art censorship essay

Articles and Features

The Fear Of Art: Contemporary Art Censorship

By Adam Hencz

Tampered photographs, removed paintings, destroyed sculptures, detained artists, and silenced opinions. Censorship is the most common violation of artistic freedom. Contemporary art and artists are unduly censored due to their creative content, which is opposed by governments, political and religious groups, social media platforms, museums, or by private individuals. Artists and advocates of artistic freedom are often silenced for questioning social and religious norms or expressing political views that oppose dominant narratives. Even so, regardless of the censors’ rationale behind removing or oppressing art, their actions potentially justify its meaning even more.

Reality has always been, from the beginnings of artistic expression, an essential vehicle for creation. The depiction of what the eyes see, and what humans feel and think, is one of the main themes for art. Nevertheless, artistic production never solely replicated reality —even during Realism it had its purpose of showing the brutality or beauty of everyday life to viewers— and neither has art ever been just a personal reflection of an artist, unengaged from the world. Its interpretation is confounded within a web of contextual meanings, exposing it to vulnerability when forced into an artificial context.

Recent acts of art censorship in museums, against works or exhibitions from renowned artists, have been interpreted by many as proof of dangerous political correctness and total disregard of the value of the pieces. Works of artists from the 19th and 20th centuries were recently deemed offensive either by museums or the public and consequently removed from display. Among others, the Manchester Art Gallery took down John William Waterhouse’s painting Hylas and the Nymphs (1896) ; Egon Schiele’s centennial exhibition advertisements suffered censorship in London and Germany; and, on the occasion of the show Balthus: Cats and Girls – Paintings and Provocations , a petition was signed by many to convince New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art to control the way people look at Balhus’ Thérèse Dreaming (1938).

Museums were established to protect artistic freedom and defend the right of art to shock and unsettle and defend the right of the viewer to be unsettled. However, institutions also tend to censor works of art on political grounds and stimulate debates. The recent case of postponing Philip Guston ’s retrospect which was scheduled to be opened in 2020 shows clear implications for the involved museums. The reasons for the postponement had little to do with Guston’s work itself and much more to do with the institutions’ lack of faith in their curators and lack of belief in the intellect of the general public’s ability to navigate the subtleties of Guston’s oeuvre. The cancellation caused a backlash from the artistic community and locked the museum world in a heated debate over race, self-censorship, social justice, appropriation and ‘cancel culture’.

Governments

Dominant forms of political narratives polarise us around the world and leave no mercy to theaters, novelists, museums and musicians who find themselves under attack for being critical of the government and governing ideologies. Forms of nationalism – or religious nationalism – have been used in Poland and Hungary, but also in India, where governments institutionalised religious bodies play a growing role in determining what is deemed appropriate in the public space. This tendency adds to the growing global trend of underfunding culture to make it vulnerable. The appointment of unprepared and unprofessional persons in key cultural positions has thus become a systemic issue.

As the largest independent international organisation defending freedom of artistic expression Freemuse reports, the Turkish, Russian, and Chinese governments abuse counterterror laws against artists, who therefore face censorship, harassment, threats, or imprisonment, accused of being close to terrorist groups or because their artwork was interpreted as a threat to the nation. The case of Turkish artist and journalist Zehra Doğan sparked media attention from human rights advocacy groups and arts communities in 2017 when she was sentenced to two years and 10 months. She was jailed, together with her work as a journalist, for a painting depicting a town in the majority-Kurdish south-east of the country that was destroyed in a Turkish military operation in 2015.

Ai Weiwei is an artist who today is known not only for his art and activism, but also his crusade against the Chinese government. Ai Weiwei uses his creative work as a vehicle to speak out against censorship, the gentrification of the art market, and to criticise China’s ruling government. In 2011 he was detained after police had searched his studio, confiscated computers, and questioned assistants. Shortly after his 81-day detention, followed by four years of de-facto house arrest, his studio in Shanghai was demolished. However, the demolition appeared to be a byproduct of Beijing’s latest urban development plans, even though it is still widely believed to be in retaliation for the artist’s criticism of the government. In 2014, days before the government-operated Power Station of Art in Shanghai was to stage an exhibition devoted to the winners of the Chinese Contemporary Art Award, officials in the city dropped his name from the artist list —removing his renowned work Sunflower Seeds from display— due to his outspoken criticism of systematic censorship.

“In the end, those who seek to censor and destroy art testify to its power, whether the work is seen as a symbol of something hated or disliked, or simply as a vessel of form.” David Freedberg

Every act of censorship is related to a larger pattern of pressure being brought against education, the press, film, and the freedom of speech. These efforts cast a shadow of fear on the public that leads to voluntary curtailment of expression by those who seek to avoid controversy and eventually fail to provide clues to the social use and function of images. However, it is key to keep David Freedberg’s words in mind during the clashes between artistic freedom and forms of silencing, that “in the end, those who seek to censor and destroy art, testify to its power —whether the work is seen as a symbol of something hated or disliked, or simply as a vessel of form”.

Relevant  sources to learn more

Find more cases in Freemuse ‘s The state of artistic freedom reports Censorpedia : An Interactive Database of Art Censorship Incidents 10 Controversial Art Pieces That Shook the Art World

• Art Movements

Censorship in the Art World and Its Impact on Creativity

Related Posts

George Roux: Master Illustrator of ‘The Spirit’ and Beyond

The Art of Royalty: Analyzing the New Portrait of King Charles III & WHY IT’S ACTUALLY GOOD

Beyond instagram: discovering new platforms for creatives in the digital age.

Unveiling the Symbolism of Picasso’s Guernica: A Masterpiece of Protest

The freedom of expression, societal norm-challenging, and thought-provoking qualities of art have long been lauded. The complex problem of censorship, however, has caused the art world to struggle throughout history. The limits of artistic expression have frequently been met with limitations due to repressive regimes and cultural sensitivities. This blog post explores the hotly contested subject of censorship in the art world, looking at its historical background, effects on artists and society, and the ongoing discussion surrounding artistic freedom.

Censorship Through the Ages: A Historical Perspective

Throughout history, various civilizations and governing entities have tried to censor and restrict artistic expression, frequently using art to spread their ideologies and quell dissent. The act of censorship in the art world has evolved over time and has been motivated by a variety of factors in societies from antiquity to the present.

Old Civilizations:

In ancient civilizations like Egypt, Greece, and Rome, art was essential to religious rituals, mythological stories, and the celebration of kings and victories. But even in these primitive societies, censorship was present. For instance, the pharaohs of ancient Egypt frequently commanded the destruction or alteration of artworks that featured the likenesses of their forebears, erasing any memory of rivals or presumed adversaries.

Censorship of Religion:

The Catholic Church had strict rules regarding religious representation and exerted significant control over art throughout the Middle Ages. Some artistic representations were destroyed or kept secret by the Church because they were thought to be heretical or sacrilegious. For example, “The Last Judgement” by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel drew criticism for its naughtiness and suggestive imagery.

Governmental and Royal Censorship

To keep their hold on power during the Renaissance and Baroque eras, strong political leaders imposed censorship. Examples include the Spanish Inquisition, which forbade any artwork it deemed to be blasphemous or toeing non-Catholic lines of thought. Similar to this, in France, the Court of Louis XIV strictly regulated the creation of art, favouring opulent depictions of the monarchy while stifling dissenting opinions.

Totalitarian governments

Censorship was used by totalitarian governments to stifle opposition and manage public opinion in the 20th century. Avant-garde and modernist art was deemed “degenerate art” by the Nazi regime in Germany, and it was banned from museums in favour of state-approved works that praised Aryan ideals and extolled Nazi ideology. Similar to how socialist realism took over as the accepted art form in Soviet Russia, communist propaganda-aligned art was demanded and artistic innovation was suppressed.

Censorship in the modern era:

Censorship is still practised today in a number of ways. Some nations continue to firmly censor artistic expression, placing limitations on its political or religious content or its criticism of the authorities. Others, on the other hand, struggle with questions of cultural sensitivity and representation, which spark discussions about artistic intention and cultural appropriation.

The Struggle for Creative Liberty:

Despite the difficulties brought on by censorship, organisations, activists, and artists have been at the forefront of the fight for the freedom to express oneself creatively and without fear of retribution. The values of free expression in the arts have been supported by movements like the American Free Speech Movement and organisations like PEN International.

The historical background of censorship in the art world demonstrates the complex interplay between political ideology, power, and the right to free expression. Artists have consistently pushed the envelope, challenging repressive regimes and social norms, even as censorship has been used as a tool to control narratives and uphold authority. Understanding the historical struggles for artistic freedom motivates us to value and protect the freedom of expression of artists, fostering a vibrant and diverse artistic landscape that reflects the complexity and richness of the human experience. Fighting for artistic freedom is still a crucial tenet of a democratic and culturally enriched world as societies continue to change.

Institutional and Curatorial Functions

The narrative surrounding art is significantly shaped by art institutions, museums, and galleries. They must carefully navigate potential controversies while organising exhibitions that represent a range of viewpoints. We go over how choices about which artworks to display or keep hidden can be a reflection of societal norms, values, and even political pressures.

Cultural Awareness and Identity

Art must deal with a variety of cultural sensitivities and identity-related issues in a globalised world. Unintentionally offensive artwork may be produced by artists, which could result in calls for its removal or censorship. We investigate the tension between cultural sensitivity and the right to free speech, which sparks discussions about artistic intent and cultural appropriation.

The remarkable power of art to break down barriers, foster human connection, and honour the diversity of cultures is unmatched. But as art travels through various cultural contexts, it might run into sensitivity issues and identity-related problems that call for cautious navigating. Fostering inclusivity, empathy, and understanding within the art world requires striking a balance between the values of artistic freedom and respect for cultural context.

Acknowledging Cultural Diversity

The world of art has evolved into a melting pot of cultures, traditions, and identities in today’s globalised society. By embracing this diversity, we can challenge the homogeneity of artistic narratives and enrich artistic expressions. Art institutions can promote intercultural understanding and celebrate the beauty of human creativity in its many forms by showcasing a wide variety of artists from various cultural backgrounds.

Honouring Cultural Traditions

The histories, ideologies, and symbols that are deeply ingrained in a particular cultural tradition are carried by the artwork. It is crucial to respect the cultural sensitivities and values these artworks represent when presenting them and to contextualise them appropriately. This necessitates careful curation choices and interpretive resources that provide information on the historical and cultural significance of the art.

Awareness of Cultural Appropriation:

When cultural components are adopted or used outside of their original context, frequently without adequate understanding or respect for their cultural significance, this is known as cultural appropriation. Artists need to be aware of this problem and handle subjects with decency and humility. It shows a commitment to ethical artistic practises to acknowledge sources of inspiration, participate in cultural exchange, and ask for permission when required.

Making Underrepresented Voices Heard:

For underrepresented communities, art can provide a potent platform for identity expression and stereotype-busting. When it comes to amplifying these voices, giving marginalised artists a platform, and making sure their stories are heard and recognised, art institutions are crucial. A more diverse and equitable art world benefits from exhibitions and collections that feature these artists.

The Power of Art to Promote Empathy

The unique capacity of art to arouse feelings and promote empathy. A deeper understanding of various cultures and identities can be gained by audiences by showcasing art that depicts diverse experiences, struggles, and triumphs. Through its ability to bring people together, art can foster intercultural communication and respect.

Collaboration and Dialogue:

Encouragement of intercultural communication and cooperation promotes a fruitful exchange of thoughts and viewpoints. In order to explore shared themes, exchange artistic methods, and collaborate on original projects, artists from various cultural backgrounds can come together. These interactions foster learning from one another, enrich artistic expression, and dispel stereotypes.

Community involvement and art education

Future generations’ perspectives on cultural sensitivity and identity are greatly influenced by art education. It fosters an appreciation for cultural diversity and promotes respectful engagement with art when teachers expose students to a variety of art forms, cultural histories, and artists from around the world.

The art world faces both opportunities and challenges as a result of cultural sensitivity and identity-related issues. A culture that celebrates cultural diversity and acknowledges the unifying power of art can be fostered by artists and art institutions by placing a high priority on inclusivity, respect, and empathy. A dedication to openness, knowledge, and ongoing conversation is necessary to navigate cultural sensitivities thoughtfully. The art world can unite society by celebrating the common humanity of people from all backgrounds by embracing diverse voices and experiences. A world that values and learns from its rich cultural tapestry can be created by fostering a culture of inclusivity and empathy, which ultimately enables art to realise its potential as a transformative force.

Dissent and Political Censorship

The ability of art to critique society and promote change has long made it a potent tool for political dissent. Nevertheless, oppressive regimes frequently stifle such expressions out of concern that art might incite the populace against them. We examine the effects of political censorship on creative expression and the fortitude of artists who opt to oppose oppressive systems.

Internal Conflict: Self-Censorship

Artists might self-censor their work in order to conform to social norms out of fear of criticism or persecution. We look at the internal conflict that artists experience as they attempt to strike a balance between their artistic visions and the need to keep their careers intact or avoid controversies.

Digital censorship on the Internet

With the development of the internet, new difficulties with censorship have arisen. Online platforms must make difficult choices about how to moderate content, frequently straddling the line between allowing for freedom of expression and removing offensive or harmful material. We investigate how digital censorship affects the spread of online artistic communities and the accessibility of art.

Fighting for Creative Freedom

The right to artistic freedom gives people the freedom to express their thoughts, feelings, and worldviews without worrying about censorship or retaliation. Artists and activists have passionately fought for artistic freedom throughout history, upholding the notion that it is essential for society to advance, to foster critical thinking, and to challenge the status quo. The struggle for artistic freedom has many facets, all of which support the protection of originality and the appreciation of various artistic viewpoints.

In support of freedom of expression:

Promoting freedom of expression has long been a priority for artists. Works of art have been effective vehicles for social criticism, political dissent, and challenging accepted norms. In repressive regimes, artists took a life-or-death stand against oppressive authorities and spoke out for the needs of marginalised groups. Their unwavering commitment to exercising their right to free expression has sparked reform movements and motivated others to take up the cause of artistic freedom.

In opposition to Censorship and Oppression:

Artists have resolutely carried on with their work despite censorship, pushing the envelope and ignoring limitations. Periods of artistic repression gave rise to many iconic works of art, highlighting the tenacity and bravery of creators in their struggle against censorship. Picasso’s “Guernica,” produced in response to the atrocities of war and oppression, is proof of the ability of art to fight injustice.

assisting at-risk artists

International organisations and other artists frequently lend support to artists who are subjected to oppressive regimes or who are threatened with harm. In addition to offering legal assistance, facilitating safe havens, and bringing attention to these artists’ plight, advocacy organisations like PEN America and Freemuse tirelessly work to defend artists who are in danger. The right of artists to create without fear is a cause for which the entire international art community is united in vigour.

Internet activism

The digital era has created more opportunities for artistic activism. By distributing their works online and through social media, artists are able to reach a global audience while avoiding censorship. Digital art also gives creators the freedom to disagree and participate in public discourse without being constrained by traditional media.

Boosting Legal Protections

Different nations have different laws defending artistic freedom, with some providing strong protections and others having repressive laws restricting free expression. By promoting legislation that defends artistic freedom and opposes restrictive regulations, artists and activists fight to strengthen legal protections. With these initiatives, we hope to foster an atmosphere that encourages artistic expression without fear of retribution.

Making Spaces for Expression Safe:

In order to foster artistic freedom, art institutions and organisations are essential. These organisations establish secure environments for creativity to flourish by organising exhibitions with a variety of viewpoints and themes, encouraging artists from underrepresented groups, and promoting discussions about censorship and artistic expression.

Fighting Self-Censorship

In addition to dangers from the outside world, artists may also experience internal pressures that cause self-censorship. Creative expression can be stifled by social pressure to fit in or by fear of backlash. In an effort to dispel these anxieties, artists and the art world support one another in urging creators to embrace their authenticity and freely express their distinctive viewpoints.

An ongoing struggle that cuts across national borders and cultural contexts is the fight for artistic freedom. A group of people dedicated to fostering dialogue, preserving creativity, and combating censorship includes artists, activists, and institutions of the arts. By valuing artistic freedom, we respect the ability of art to inspire, arouse thought, and spark constructive change. The struggle for artistic freedom is a declaration of the idea that the free expression of creativity is a fundamental human right and essential to the development of a thriving democracy. By maintaining this fight, we make sure that artists keep reshaping the world with their distinctive ideas, inspiring future generations and serving as a constant reminder of the unstoppable spirit of artistic expression.

In the world of art, censorship continues to be a contentious issue that pushes the limits of artistic freedom and forces societies to face uncomfortable truths. The battle for freedom of expression rages on even as political factors and cultural sensitivities influence the artistic landscape. Fostering open discourse, defending artistic freedom, and upholding the notion that art, in all its varied forms, is a potent catalyst for social progress and human understanding are essential as we negotiate the difficult terrain of censorship. We cannot fully comprehend the transformative power of art in reshaping the world we live in unless we embrace a wide variety of artistic voices and perspectives.

Oh hi there 👋 It’s nice to meet you.

Sign up to receive awesome content in your inbox from us.

We don’t spam!

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

How to Become Cultured in Art

All about untitled by eva hesse, creative flair.

Official Creative Flair Account

George Roux, a renowned French illustrator, left an indelible mark on the art world...

The unveiling of a new portrait of King Charles III has captured the attention...

For creatives who have relied on Instagram as their major platform for a long...

Pablo Picasso's "Guernica" is not just a painting; it is a profound political statement...

Most Popular

All Hidden Symbols & Meanings In Picasso’s Guernica

Rare Teenage Photos Surface of Banksy Before His Rise to Fame

Van Gogh’s “Starry Night”: Symbols, Techniques, and Impact

10 Optical Illusions In Famous Works Of Art

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Sign Up for our Newsletter

Drawing Exercises for Beginners

The Effects of Art and Culture on Todays Modern Society

Frieze New York 2024: A Fusion of Iconic and Emerging Art

Livestream Portal Reopens in Dublin and New York Following Lewd Behavior

Artist Joseph Awuah-Darko Accuses Kehinde Wiley of Sexual Assault

Billionaire Calls for Removal of ‘Unflattering’ Portrait from National Gallery of Australia

© 2024 Creative Flair Blog

Navigate Site

• Main Website

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Remember Me

Create New Account!

Fill the forms below to register

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Are you sure want to unlock this post?

Are you sure want to cancel subscription.

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Censorship — Censorship of Art and Freedom of Expression

Censorship of Art and Freedom of Expression

• Categories: Art History Censorship

About this sample

Words: 1037 |

Published: May 19, 2020

Words: 1037 | Pages: 2 | 6 min read

Table of contents

A divide in the art world, the next wave, resonating loudly, works cited.

• Black, H. (2017). Letter to the curators of the Whitney Biennial. Retrieved from https://www.documentjournal.com/2017/03/hannah-black-letter-to-the-curators-of-the-whitney-biennial/
• Smith, R. (2017). Should art that infuriates be removed? Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/28/arts/design/should-art-that-infuriates-be-removed.html
• Viso, O. (2020). Decolonizing the art museum: The next wave. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/23/arts/design/museums-race-protests.html
• Walker, K. (2017). Instagram post. Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/p/BSNZX1YAXiI/
• Banks, M. (Ed.). (2007). Controversies in Art: Artistic Freedom, Censorship, and Public Funding. New York, NY: New York University Press.
• Bredekamp, H., & Diers, M. (Eds.). (2012). Art and Controversy: The Role of Art in Politics and Society. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.
• Canaday, J. (2019). The Politics of Display: Museums, Science, Culture. New York, NY: Routledge.
• De Bolla, P. (2012). Art Matters: A Critical Commentary on Heidegger’s “The Origin of the Work of Art.” In P. de Bolla (Ed.), Art Matters: A Critical Commentary on Heidegger’s “The Origin of the Work of Art” (pp. 1-10). London, UK: University of Chicago Press.
• Meskimmon, M. (2013). Contemporary Art and the Cosmopolitan Imagination. London, UK: Routledge.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Arts & Culture Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 570 words

1 pages / 408 words

3 pages / 1296 words

3 pages / 1531 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Censorship

Censorship is a practice that has been used across many governmental systems throughout history. In the novel Fahrenheit 451, author Ray Bradbury explores the latent damages that arise when censorship is placed upon a society. [...]

Ray Bradbury paints a haunting picture of a society consumed by mindless entertainment, where books are banned and intellectual curiosity is stifled. Through his vivid portrayal of this futuristic world, Bradbury raises [...]

In conclusion, Fahrenheit 451 is a thought-provoking novel that explores the themes of censorship, the dangers of technology, and the importance of intellectual freedom. Through its cautionary tale, Ray Bradbury invites us to [...]

However, there has been a long-standing debate about whether certain books should be banned from public spaces, schools, and libraries due to their content. While it is important to acknowledge that some material may be [...]

“Everything faded into mist. The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth.” This line, delivered in George Orwell’s sinister book, 1984, exemplifies a totalitarian government censoring information, [...]

While some argue that censorship can protect society from harmful ideas, Fahrenheit 451 presents a counterargument that censorship can create a society that is intellectually stagnant and vulnerable to manipulation. By [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

September 6, 2023

John William Waterhouse, Hylas and the Nymphs, 1896. Image via Wikimedia Commons.

By Esther Neville

Censorship in the art world has sparked enormous debate, as it navigates the delicate balance between freedom of expression and cultural sensitivities. Internationally, art has long served as a reflection of human expression and cultural evolution; however, the clash between creative freedom and societal norms often ends in contentious debates and prison challenges. This article analyzes recent cases of art censorship in various forms.

Many have viewed recent museum censorship actions against well-known artists’ works or shows as evidence of political correctness and with complete disregard for the merit of the artworks. [1] [1] Recently, works by 19 th and 20th-century painters were judged by institutions and were taken down from exhibitions.

For instance, the Manchester Art Gallery removed John William Waterhouse´s Hylas and the Nymphs (1896) due to its nudity and portrayal of an erotic Victorian fantasy. However, the Gallery´s purpose for this was to “prompt conversation;” they asked the audience about their opinion on how this artwork should be interpreted. [2] Visitors then read this commentary on notes, which were attached to the place formerly reserved for Waterhouse’s painting. [3]

Michelangelo´s David

Additionally, one of the most recent cases of censorship occurred last March 2023. Hope Carrasquilla, a former principal at Tallahassee Classical School in Florida, was fired for presenting Michelangelo’s David in her art class. [4] Several parents complained about the nudity of the sculpture and did not agree with presenting such artwork to their children. As a result, the former Tallahassee principal was forced to resign. Other examples of “controversial” artworks containing nude bodies shown in the Renaissance art class include The Creation of Adam by Michelangelo and Botticelli´s Birth of Venus . [5] According to the case, a letter should have been sent out to the parents detailing what was going to be shown in the classroom. Carrasquilla stated that she assumed the letter went out and didn’t follow up. Even though many parents defined the sculpture as “pornographic” and thus inappropriate, there were others who did not think so. Similarly, Florida´s Department of Education declared that the David sculpture has artistic and historical value. [6]

After the news of this Florida censorship case came out, many were outraged and shocked. In particular, Italian politicians complained about the incident. The country´s deputy premier Matteo Salvini stated in a tweet that “obscuring and erasing history, art, and culture for girls and boys is absolutely crazy and there is nothing correct about it.” [7] The Florence mayor Dario Nardella also took it a step further and invited Carrasquilla to Florence to give her recognition. The Director of the Galleria dell´Accademia Cecilie Hollberg gave the teacher a tour around the gallery, as well, so she could admire and see the sculpture in real life. Hollberg later stated, “To think that David could be pornographic means truly not understanding the contents of the Bible, not understanding Western culture, and not understanding Renaissance art.” [8]

This dismissal raised the question of the depiction of nudity in artwork and whether it has instructional relevance and also demonstrated the implications of censorship in art schooling. [9] This makes us wonder what the limits on censorship are. Most of the classical sculptures that portray topics like history and myths have some sort of nudity. Will this part of history be erased and forgotten?

The Prophet Muhammad

Nudity in art is not the only theme facing censorship. Another case of censorship of artworks in the educational system occurred at Hamline University, a private liberal arts college in St. Paul. In 2022, a professor was terminated for showing several artworks depicting the Prophet Muhammad in an art history class. [10] The controversial dismissal stemmed from non-secular sensitivities, with opponents arguing that such depictions were blasphemous and offensive. The First Amendment of the American Constitution protects freedom of expression, however, it also recognizes that positive speech might also incite harm or disrupt societal concord. [11]

This case has raised important questions about censorship within the art world and the principle of academic freedom. While using such an image can have pedagogical value in certain courses, displaying an image of Muhammad can be deeply offensive to many individuals for religious reasons. [12] By firing the professor, Hamline University disregarded the mandate from the Higher Learning Commission, which requires accredited institutions to uphold academic freedom. [13] The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) expressed concerns about this incident, they called for the professor’s reinstatement and have filed a formal complaint with Hamline’s accrediting body, citing the college’s failure to support faculty in their pursuit of educational freedom. [14] Many of the supporters of the professor argue that labelling the depiction as Islamophobic is inaccurate and diverts attention from genuine instances of hatred. They contend that the university’s response to the incident, which appears to prioritize appeasing a minority organization over defending academic freedom, has led to significant grievances within the community. This situation underscores the ongoing debate over how to balance academic freedom with sensitivity to religious beliefs and cultural sensitivities, posing a challenge for institutions of higher learning.

This incident prompts us to contemplate a series of important questions within the context of a liberal arts community. Specifically, it raises inquiries regarding the appropriateness of engaging in a comprehensive examination of certain subjects and whether a professor of art history should feel comfortable sharing substantial artworks with students without concerns about potential consequences, such as termination, stemming from objections raised by other students or external parties. Furthermore, it is crucial to mention that many of the artworks that were shown in this situation were created by Muslim artists with the explicit intention of resonating with a Muslim audience. These artistic expressions were born out of a deep sense of admiration and reverence for figures such as Muhammad and the Quran; they were not intended to be provocative or offensive in any way. However, what is notable is the stark contrast between this artistic intent and the characterization of these depictions by certain Hamline administrators; as they have labelled these Islamic portrayals of Muhammad as exhibiting traits of hate, intolerance, and Islamophobia, raising the question of whether this interpretation aligns with the intended message of the artists and the principles of academic freedom that liberal arts institutions hold dear. This juxtaposition of artistic intent and administrative perspective underscores the complexity of navigating sensitive cultural and religious subjects in an educational setting. [15]

All of these cases show us how critical their historical context is when comparing the legality of such censorship. Many artistic endeavours throughout history, especially from the Renaissance period, consist of nudity. Censoring those portions risks erasing an integral part of artwork records. Courts may not forget whether the paintings’ nudity serves a valid creative or instructional reason, and whether or not it qualifies as obscenity beneath the regulation. Additionally, institutions can be pressured to balance cultural sensitivities and the necessity of offering art in its ancient and inventive context.

Censorship inside the art world presents complicated demanding situations, intersecting with First Amendment rights, educational freedom, cultural sensitivity, and historical renovation. In both instances examined, courts ought to examine the quantity to which creative expression aligns with societal norms and values. It is vital to shield the academic cost of artwork, even if it every now and then conflicts with installed norms.

These cases underscore the necessity of open communication between instructional establishments, college students, artists, and groups. The regulation needs to provide a framework that encourages discussion and debate while respecting diverse perspectives. By doing so, we are able to ensure that art, as a reflection of human creativity and cultural evolution, enhances our society without compromising the essential concepts of freedom and respect.

Disclaimer: This and all articles are intended as general information, not legal advice, and offer no substitution for seeking representation.

About the author

Esther Neville (Summer 2023 legal intern at the Center for Art Law) is finishing her European Law Bachelor at Maastricht University, with a minor in Art, Law and Policy Making. She wishes to combine her academics with her passion for the arts. She works on the Anti-Money Laundering Study Project at the Center.

Further Reading

• Gareth Harris, “Trigger Warning: a new column on censorship in art today, from must-read books to which algorithms are policing creative content,” The Art Newspaper (Sept. 5, 2022), available at   https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2022/09/05/an-experts-guide-to-censorship-four-must-read-books
• “Is art censorship on the rise? How freedom of expression is being curbed across the globe” The Art Newspaper (Sept. 9, 2022), https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2022/09/09/is-art-censorship-on-the-rise-how-freedom-of-expression-is-being-curbed-across-the-globe
• Kelly Grovier, “Michelangelo’s David and 10 artworks that caused a scandal,” BBC (Mar. 27, 2023), https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20171018-the-works-too-scandalous-for-display

Bibliography

• Hencz, The Fear of Art: Contemporary Art Censorship, Artland Magazine (2023), https://magazine.artland.com/the-fear-of-art-contemporary-art-censorship/ ↑
• Brown, Gallery removes naked nymphs painting to “prompt conversation”, The Guardian (2018) https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/jan/31/manchester-art-gallery-removes-waterhouse-naked-nymphs-painting-prompt-conversation ↑
• Millership, This Artwork Changed My Life: John William Waterhouse´s “Hylas and the Nymphs” , Artsy (2020), https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-artwork-changed-life-john-william-waterhouses-hylas-nymphs ↑
• Whiddington, The Florida Principal Fired for Allowing a Lesson on Michelangelo’s ‘David’ Went to Italy to See the Sculpture Herself—and Was Rather Impressed, Artnet News (2023), https://news.artnet.com/art-world/fired-florida-principal-visited-michelangelo-david-2292636 ↑
• Cascone, Florida’s Department of Education Declares ‘David’ a Work of ‘Artistic Value’ After a Principal Was Fired Over a Lesson Showing the Nude, Artnet News (2023)https://news.artnet.com/art-world/florida-department-of-education-declares-david-art-not-porn-2280637 ↑
• Wanted in Rome, Florida school principal fired for showing students Michelangelo´s David, (2023)https://www.wantedinrome.com/news/florida-school-principal-fired-michelangelo-david.html ↑
• Mueller, Italian mayor defends Florida principal forced out over ‘David’ statue, The Hill (2023)https://thehill.com/homenews/3919221-italian-mayor-defends-florida-principal-forced-out-over-david-statue/ ↑
• Kim, A Florida principal who was fired after showing students ‘David’ is welcomed in Italy, NPR (2023) https://www.npr.org/2023/05/01/1173017248/florida-principal-david-michelangelo-visit-italy ↑
• Lawson- Tancred, Muslim Group Urges the Reinstatement of Fired U.S. Professor, Saying the Prophet Muhammad Painting She Showed to Students Was Not Islamophobic, ArtNet News (2023)https://news.artnet.com/art-world/fired-professor-hamline-not-islamophobic-2241214 ↑
• NY Times, A Lecturer Showed a Painting of the Prophet Muhammad. She Lost Her Job, (2023) https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/08/us/hamline-university-islam-prophet-muhammad.html ↑
• Cascone, A Minnesota University Is Under Fire for Dismissing an Art History Professor Who Showed Medieval Paintings of the Prophet Muhammad, ArtNet News, (2023) https://news.artnet.com/art-world/professor-terminated-art-history-paintings-muhammad-2238922#:~:text=In%20a%20controversial%20move%2C%20an,founder%20of%20the%20Islamic%20religion . ↑
• Higher Learning Commission, HLC Policy, Policy Title: Criteria for Accreditation, Number: CRRT.B.10.010,(1992) ↑
• Fire, FIRE files accreditor complaint over Minnesota art history professor fired for showing Muhammad painting, (2023)https://www.thefire.org/news/fire-files-accreditor-complaint-over-minnesota-art-history-professor-fired-showing-muhammad ↑

Disclaimer: This article is for educational purposes only and is not meant to provide legal advice. Readers should not construe or rely on any comment or statement in this article as legal advice. For legal advice, readers should seek an attorney.

Related Posts

Deciphering the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and its Effects on Reclaiming Looted Art

Color Blocking: How to Protect A Color

Secrecy in Museums Administration

Become a member.

Since 2009, the Center for Art Law has organized hundreds of events and published over 1,200 relevant, accessible, and editorially independent articles. As a nonprofit working with artists and students, the Center for Art Law relies on your support to fund our work. Become a premium subscriber and gain access to discounts on events and archives of articles and/or hundreds of case summaries, intended for a worldwide audience of legal professionals, artists, researchers, and students

Thaler v. Perlmutter, Civil Action No. 22-1564 (BAH) (D.C. Aug. 18, 2023).

Case Law Corner

Read case law summaries and enjoy unlimited access to our legendary Case Law Corner, now in a new and improved Database with over 500 entries.

Annual Subscription

• Access to all articles and past-event recordings
• Access to Case Law Database
• Free and discounted access to events
• Discounts to third-party events

Artist & Student Membership

• Access to our Case Law Database

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Trigger Warning: a new column on censorship in art today, from must-read books to which algorithms are policing creative content

Our chief contributing editor gareth harris will examine attacks on freedom of artistic expression and issues like ‘cancel culture’, providing valuable insights and context.

Image from the Don't Delete Art campaign instagram account @dontdelete.art

Original photograph by AdeY, altered for the Don't Delete Art campaign

In this bi-monthly blog, our chief contributing editor Gareth Harris examines cases of censorship worldwide, focusing on who the censors are and why they are clamping down on forms of artistic expression.

I write in my book, Censored Art Today: “We are in a new age of suppression with censorship on the rise in many different forms." Censored Art Today focuses on “the new age of censorship”. Art censorship is a centuries-old issue. But how and why freedom of expression is under threat has taken on extra resonance in the 21st century.

“Artists, museums and historic statues are, to use the contemporary term, being ‘cancelled’ in an ongoing critical debate around their status and value. The perfect storm of a pandemic, the advancement of anti-intellectual populist governments worldwide and uprisings against discrimination and inequality such as Black Lives Matter have brought about a reset of perspectives and principles,” I write in the publication.

Along with the book I am launching the bi-monthly blog Trigger Warning, which will examine censorship cases worldwide, focusing on who the censors are and why they are clamping down on forms of artistic expression. The aim is to drill down on censorship episodes, analysing the implications for artists and the art world, and how such cases inform the debate around issues that dominate contemporary discourse.

The divide between "woke" and "anti-woke" factions is, for instance, not lessening but intensifying; this ideological chasm is complex and shifting but the fallout of censorship is often ignored (not anymore). In the course of my blog journey, I want to look at the different contexts in which artists, museums and curators face restrictions today, focusing on hot topics such as the algorithms policing art online and the narratives around problematic monuments. Unpicking the new “culture wars” is challenging but necessary.

As a preamble, please see below five must-read books on art and censorship that helped with my research and crucially are shaping the conversation on who is censoring who today.

Curating Under Pressure: International Perspectives on Negotiating Conflict and Upholding Integrity (2020), edited by Janet Marstine and Svetlana Mintcheva

“This insightful volume looks at the pressures on curators worldwide to self censor and how arts professionals are finding ways to operate under oppressive regimes. Janet Marstine highlights, for instance, how ‘practitioners in China and Hong Kong have developed a diverse toolkit of strategies and tactics to resist censorship and self-censorship’, including using coded language—such as ingenious euphemisms, memes and homophones—to evade detection.”

Teachable Monuments: Using Public Art to Spark Dialogue and Confront Controversy (2021, pictured above), edited by Harriet Senie, Sierra Rooney and Jennifer Wingate

“This guide for teachers and arts administrators presents a wealth of information about ‘problematic’ public statuary, acting as a springboard for discussions around Confederate monuments and landmarks in the US. Plain-speaking essays and case studies demonstrate how monuments can be used to deepen civic and historical engagement and social dialogue. Wingate told the Public Art Dialogue journal that ‘more and more, the removals or the conversations around removals are the teachable moments. It’s important to keep the conversations going, because taking monuments down doesn’t solve the problems they embody’.”

The censorship books featured in the ultimate reading list

Dangerous Moves: Performance and Politics in Cuba (2015, pictured above) by Coco Fusco

“Coco Fusco, an expert on post-revolutionary Cuba, considers how artists such as Angel Delgado and Sandra Ceballos, and collectives such as Omni Zona Franca, have developed their politically engaged practices in the authoritarian state. Her study highlights two key periods of upheaval in Cuba: the late 1980s, when performance art was gaining in popularity, and the early 2000s, when the genre re-emerged as an unofficial subculture.”

Ai Weiwei: 1,000 Years of Joys and Sorrows, A Memoir (2021) by Ai Weiwei

“The Chinese artist and activist Ai Weiwei brings extra resonance to any discussion on art censorship; in 2011, he was detained by the Chinese government for 81 days without any formal charges, an experience that shaped his artistic vision. ‘For me, inspiration comes from resistance—without that, my efforts would be fruitless,’ he writes. Speaking to me for my book, he warned that ‘the mainstream media and entertainment industry in the West are under the influence of corporations and large enterprises. Corporatocracy is very often stronger than authoritarianism of any state because it is multinational.’”

Censoring Art: Silencing the Artwork (2018), edited by Riann Coulter and Roísín Kennedy

“The scale of Riann Coulter and Roísín Kennedy’s study is impressive, focusing on the mechanisms of art censorship across distinct geopolitical and cultural contexts, from Iran, Japan, and Uzbekistan to Ireland, Canada, Macedonia, and Soviet Russia. Essays from a variety of scholars cover topics such as art and censorship in Stalin’s Russia and contemporary art created in Macedonia in the shadow of Alexander the Great. The editors write that ‘exposing its mechanism [censorship] enables us to have a greater understanding of the conflicting frameworks in which the artwork functions.’”

• Censored Art Today: Hot Topics in the Art World , Gareth Harris, Lund Humphries and Sotheby's Institute of Art, 104pp, £19.99 (hb)

Gareth Harris is the author of  Censored Art Today (Lund Humphries/Sotheby’s Institute of Art, 2022, available in the UK and US). He is chief contributing editor at The Art Newspaper where he has covered censorship stories and issues for more than two decades. His next publication focuses on art-world ethics.

Metacritic Journal

For comparative studies and theory, arguing for art, debating censorship, liviu malița.

Recommended Citation: Malița, Liviu. “Arguing for Art, Debating Censorship.” Metacritic Journal for Comparative Studies and Theory 5.1 (2019): https://doi.org/10.24193/mjcst.2019.7.01

While the debate about the legitimacy of censorship or about its social and moral usefulness is rather old, decisive conclusions are yet to be reached. Art is a sensitive area of inquiry since there is a belief that only art should be exempted from censorship. It is necessary to distinguish between freedom of expression per se (which is a guaranteed fundamental right) and artistic freedom. Regarding the former, limitations are necessary to protect the dignity of the person and his fundamental rights, 1 as well as to combat attitudes that are perceived as forms of “hate speech” (Frederick 86), but they may also be essential for ensuring fair competition rights. However, these limitations (which have their justification in the field of existence) “cannot be extrapolated along with the same prohibitions and the same penalties to works of art” (Huberman, qtd. in Burnet 44).

The very fictional character of art cancels out this transfer, by way of transfiguration. In an interview given during the “One World Romania” International Human Rights Documentary Film Festival (2012), Alexei Plutser-Sarno (a member of the Russian Voina group, an “anarchist punk-rock artistic movement”) stated that “between art and challenge, between art and crime, there are neither borders, nor any other types of interaction. They are situated in different planes, in worlds that never intersect.” 2 The idea that censorship cannot be applied to art belongs to a tradition that goes back to Aristotle (Sapiro 108). The work of art has a different ontological classification than the real fact; therefore, a different legal classification is required. Art is fictional, so it is “beyond good and evil.” Artworks must be removed from the jurisdiction of law courts because they are legally unclassifiable. Even among those who concede that art must be subjected to some form of control there are many who assert that literary works, for example, should not be treated with the same severity as political, moral or scientific writings.

Art and Justice

Several arguments converge to show that justice is not qualified to judge artistic offences.

1.1. The Conservatism of Justice

The myopia of justice is explained by the conservative principle of law, in comparison with the innovative dimension of art. It is difficult, if not impossible (given the inertia of the system and the slow pace of the legal apparatus) for the dynamics of artistic transformations to be promptly reflected in the legislation. The legal act therefore tends to be lagging behind artistic phenomena. Incriminated works are often judged according to definitions belonging to an earlier stage of art. 3 Such definitions are ineffective for assessing contemporary productions, which are always the subject of dispute. Often, in the case of inaugural works, what irritates and may cause rejection is the violation of artistic conventions rather than the transgression of moral norms. The risk to which a judge may be exposed is to make the unfortunate mistake of confusing morally offensive productions with artistic works that are deemed to be outrageous on account of their transgression against the frameworks of perception and the rules of artistic representation (Sapiro 295). The lack of synchronization (between the body of laws and the legal doctrine, on the one hand, and the social and artistic mutations of the present, on the other) threatens to delegitimize punishment, taking into account the fact that, in time, the boundaries of permissiveness have kept being pushed. The facts reveal the conservative character of censorship as opposed to the experimental character of contemporary art. The purpose of censorship is to strengthen cultural taboos (Willis 58, qtd. in Jacobsen 2) and to preserve traditional artistic values by discrediting modernist trends. Ultimately, under the utopian pretext of preserving morality intact, censorship leads, in fact, to the asphyxiation of the cultural space. Judging works of art and condemning the artists may paradoxically entail a situation where moral caveats become aesthetic shackles that block creation.

2. The judge’s artistic incompetence

A judge lacks the necessary authority to evaluate art. He does not condemn, as it is claimed, professions of immoral faith, but opts between various opposing morals (e.g. surrealist morality vs. bourgeois morality); because of his insufficient artistic training, the judge risks levelling artworks down when assessing them (Brochier 67). Legal conservatism often goes hand in hand with artistic mediocrity.

The “symbolically unlimited” nature of the work of art (to use a phrase belonging to Tudor Vianu) complicates matters. Thus, if we take the case of literature, the accusations that have been levelled against it have sparked a public debate on the interpretation of texts. Traditionally, justice has chosen (when deemed necessary) to condemn literary works for content-related issues. Gradually, the instability of meaning and the fundamental ambiguity of literary texts led, however, to querying not only the content, but also the form of discourse, the literary genre, the style and those components considered to epitomize the artistic personality of writers and their authorial intentions. 4 At the same time, the judges’ literary incompetence became obvious (compromising the authority of their decisions), and their opinions came to be seen as the opinions of non-experts on aesthetic matters.

Surely, a judge can appeal to the institution of expert witnesses (artists, art critics). However, this procedure poses a twofold inconvenience. The first (perfectible) consists in the manner of making the selection. The second (fundamental) refers to the fact that proper expertise is difficult to obtain. It is usually the case that artistically innovative works end up in court, works that are contested in their own field of origin, since it takes time for their innovative contribution to be comprehended and for such works to forge a pathway in their own (artistic) domain. As a result, expert witnesses can contradict one another, depending on the artistic ideology they uphold. 5

There are, of course, exceptions which may prove the aesthetic acuity of judges. A possible example is provided by the way in which a complaint against the poster of the film Amen by Costa-Gavras (2002) was settled in court. The poster is “a parodic composition, depicting a red cross that is highlighted against a dark background, extending along three sides in the shape of a hooked cross.” “Thanks to a skilful graphic game,” the poster denounced the Vatican’s role in the Second World War, “uniting the Christian cross and the hooked cross into one symbol.” Catholic bishops protested against the “unacceptable assimilation” and intolerable identification of the symbol of Christian faith with Nazi barbarity. The judge, however, did not settle the case in the bishops’ favour, considering that the author (Oliviero Toscani) could not be penalized. The president of the court rejected this “close reading” and deciphered in the incriminated image “the will to break down the Nazi cross, a symbol of totalitarianism, and to replant in the ground, as if to rehumanize it, the cross that every community continues to bear.” In the reasoning, the judge argued that “the swastika is incomplete, one arm being slanted downwards...” (Saint-Martin 66-69). Even multiplied, however, such examples do not constitute sufficient legal justification. On the contrary, they attest to the fact that it is always likely that the decision to ban a work of art may reflect the judge’s subjective preferences and aversions and not the intersubjective views of public opinion. The exceptions actually shed light on the kind of social role that the judge performs as a defender of the status quo , which is constantly contested by artists.

It has therefore been concluded that it would be ridiculous for the aesthetic value of an artwork to be discussed in court. 6 Artists themselves have been concerned to delegitimize such an approach. As for the justice system, it has compromised itself by reaching questionable decisions and by condemning several great artists throughout history.

3. The burden of proof concerning the harmfulness of art

It is, in fact, really difficult to produce the legal evidence that will prove (alleged) artistic offences, which are converted, by association, into non-artistic offences, as a rule. André Glucksmann believes that, as far as art is concerned, justice has failed to develop a “code of social threats” (Glucksmann 80). If it can be said to even exist, the harmful content of art is difficult to prove, so the driving force of censorship is not a certainty, but an anxiety, whose cultural perception is the “fear of representations” (Goady, qtd. in Glucksmann 76). The procedure, therefore, is exactly the opposite: first it resorts to exclusion (in order to protect) and only then is the “dangerous” nature of the censored content invoked, a content that is not so much the cause of the interdiction as its consequence. The very exclusion operated by censorship grants a work of art this “dangerous” character (sometimes abusively). The most common accusations against art are, therefore, those of immorality (pornography, obscenity), of “attacks against good morals” or of inciting violence, hatred, and racism. All three categories present controversial aspects.

(i) Art and pornography

The encounter between art and pornography is epistemically explosive (as it takes place between two “open” concepts, each likely to generate controversy) and is considered to be, according to legal norms, morally culpable. The question is whether it is rigorously possible to avoid this encounter. By systematizing the huge bibliography on this subject, Hans Maes inventories the main opinions expressed on this topic. The most prominent, first voiced by Peter Webb (1975) and frequently resumed afterwards, states that the dividing line between art and pornography is clear to the point of incompatibility. 7 There are also some classic ways to mark that difference. 8 However, the problem is that there are some generic differences which are difficult to prove in practice, where the situation is ambivalent. In any case, Maes contends, these dichotomies operated between some prototypical examples “will not serve to justify the claim that art and pornography are mutually exclusive.” A second sample, opposed to the first one, consists of theories which, taking note of the frequent violations of territory from both sides, argue either that pornography should be dissociated from obscenity, suggesting that only obscenity is incompatible with art (Huer; Mey; Graham), 9 or that pornography has an aesthetic dimension. 10 In any case, the differences are often minimal (quasi-imperceptible), generating errors. In the fine arts or in theatre and film, regrettable confusion has often been made between artistic nudity and pornography, for example. The works of writers like Flaubert, Byron or Baudelaire were condemned, in their own time, because of a blindness defined as ridiculous by posterity. Finally, to eliminate conceptual obscurity, it is recommended that one should consistently use the term “erotic” to denote the presence of sexual/sensual elements that are artistically transfigured in works of art.

Avoiding to let myself enmeshed in ever more refined conceptual distinctions, I will resume the conclusion reached by Maes, according to whom the best argument that the notion of “pornographic art” is not oxymoronic, but designates a legitimate artistic category is the very existence of pornographic artworks. His examples include Pauline Réage’s novel Histoire d’O , Nagisa Ôshima ‘s film In the Realm of the Senses , Kitagawa Utamaro’s woodblock print Woman with man with black cloth and food service , or Mapplethorpe’s photograph Jim and Tom, Sausalito . 11 If we continue to trace the line of demarcation between art and pornography with the firmness demanded by some theorists, many of the works of unquestionable artistic merit, Maes concludes, are on the “wrong” side (Maes, Drawing 4). Despite this argument, however, the suspicion remains that a work can be genuine both as art and as pornography, 12 thus rendering the whole process as a circular one.

The sheer scale of theoretical debates on this issue reveals the difficulties of deciding in court on the pornographic/obscene character of a work and of providing a credible reasoning for the penalties applied. Achieving a hypothetical consensus does not close the file. There are radical interrogations of the socially dangerous and morally degrading nature of pornography 13 and of the legitimacy of the government to ban its citizens from publishing and/or watching it. 14 The dispute is waged between the right to freedom of expression and, respectively, the right to dignity and identity (self-image). The former is a fundamental right and includes (in the context) the freedom of autonomous beings to pursue their own conception of development and to expand/diversify, through experimentation, their means of sexual gratification. 15 However, to the extent that pornography is considered harmful in emotional and relational terms, offensive and corrupting from a moral point of view, inducing libertinism, proposing role models that might deteriorate the self-image of people as social beings and partaking of “hate speech,” the right to free expression must be, in its case, (severely) restricted.

Even though, in life, pornography can be condemned (at least on account that it tends to corrode the organizational structures of society, attacking the core of the family and, by default, that of social cohesion), in art its harmful effect is, for many, unlikely. Symbolic transfiguration cancels it out.

In the case of literature, the situation is further complicated. Writings with explicit pornographic content (such as Sade’s novels) have a distinct philosophical character, which should protect them against censorship. They “not so much excite readers, as they fascinate intellectuals; hence, their weak erotic character” (Baudrillard 45). In addition, the accumulating effect of (perverse) sex sequences leads to a voidance of desire. The internal analysis of a literary work is not, however, necessarily conclusive. Often insufficient, it must be corroborated with contextualization. 16 In fact, contextualism is inherent to late modern aesthetics, according to which artistic status is not intrinsic, but relational and extrinsic to the work (see ready-made artefacts).

Regardless of the credibility of such arguments, the solution is not, one might think, that of banning these works. Such a measure can only limit access to those books, which will continue to circulate in clandestine forms, producing, sometimes, not only a more powerful impact (through the secondary effect of reverse advertisement), but also proposing a distorted reading of those texts, in the sense of strengthening their “pornographic” character. The hypothetical argument is that reading selectively (in the case of adolescents, for example) certain “debauched” fragments increases, by decontextualization, the degree of perversity of those scenes, if they are read exclusively through that lens. No matter how raw and, apparently, not transfigured artistically, such blameable fragments present in literary works have an altogether different significance by the very fact that they are not confined to themselves, but belong to a parabolic whole, which transcends them. Only within the context as a whole do they acquire aesthetic value and do they reveal their problematizing, ironic, visionary, etc. dimensions. The part is resignified because it belongs to a whole that is so radically different from it. Thus, by being embedded in a broader and infinitely more complex narrative structure, these fragments are absolved of their degrading status, no matter how crude the language might be. They benefit from a “system effect”. In other words, a great writer can afford the coarseness of a pornographer without becoming one himself.

(ii) The offence and the encroachment on morality

Indecency is an obscure offence 17 (the law does not define it precisely), undermined by a theoretical insufficiency. 18 It remains, however, the most common wrongdoing in the name of which artists and journalists have been prosecuted, despite the fact that the fictional status of art should absolve one from such liability. True art cannot corrupt: it has a rectifying rather than a corrupting role. Naturally, disputes also persist on this topic. 19

(iii) Incitement to violence

The relationship between art and violence is so old that it seems inextricable. The film industry has enhanced it exponentially. The aestheticization of violence becomes an actionable matter when there is a suspicion that the work of art incites to hatred and could lead to acts of violence. In this case, however, it cannot be demonstrated (as the law claims) that there is a direct causation between reading a book or watching a violent film and committing criminal acts. 20 The work of art is an inextricable mixture of reality and illusion, which we cannot translate tale quale into reality. The transition to action negates the artistic status of the work: art, Kenneth Clark claims, loses its true character when it incites to action (Clark, qtd. in Maes). It remains a subject of controversy whether art really augments violence (fuelling or expanding it) or whether it amounts (in Aristotelian terms) to a form of purgation, to an imaginary escape valve, which allows the release of the aggressive potential through a phantasmatic experience.

Like indecency, incitement to violence is an imprecise offence. This imprecision paves the way for abuse (Sapiro 97). Each of these is, Gisèle Sapiro notes, a vague and flexible formula used in the court of justice when one cannot be prosecuted for more precisely defined crimes (Sapiro 102). There are no arguments to uphold the accusation of an “attack on good morals” or “public morals,” only “the cry of an outraged conscience”: this article of the law is nothing more than a “weapon of society, used to defend itself from what it deems can hurt it” (Sapiro 101-102). Keeping them in the Criminal Code requires stricter rephrasing. To this point, however, the way to reach consensus on legal action against art remains insufficiently clarified. Nor is it clear where we draw the limit between the freedom of the judiciary and the non-democratic restriction of the freedom of expression of the person undergoing trial. Where exactly does the disagreement between them start?

4. The misdemeanour of opinion

Such crimes (pornography, incitement to violence, indecency) contain a blatant contradiction, which can discredit the very fight against them. At the same time, the distinction between a wrongdoing and a misdemeanour of opinion is among the tests that can tell the difference between liberal societies and totalitarian regimes. The post factum legitimation of prohibitions is built around the argument that they punish culpable acts, which represent an abuse of the right to free speech. Conversely, the severity of preventive censorship (the only one that, some people maintain, deserves this name!) derives from the fact that it penalizes a misdemeanour of opinion, considered culpable because it does not comply with the official viewpoint. 21 The legal issue of the misdemeanour of opinion continues to fuel the dilemma. 22

Literature is a limit-case, in which the two perspectives cannot overlap. In this area, the very definition of the notion of “act” is problematic. In order to review the polemics, it suffices if we refer to the theory of commitment (in a moral and ontological sense) proposed by Sartre, a theory used to justify the indictment and conviction of French writers who collaborated with the Nazi regime, under Nazi occupation). Sartre argues that “to publish” is an act. The democratic argument (actually, a fallacy) is that what is censored is the act of publication (a deed that is objectively attributable to the publisher and the author, the only deed relevant to criminal law) and not the discourse itself, no matter how important the ideas would be as a basis for action. 23 Let us note, first, that publishing is tantamount to inciting , in order to admit, in step two, that ideas are actually being censored. 24 Literature relativizes the distinction between mere words and deeds, because, in a sense, the written word (writing) is the writer’s defining activity par excellence. Even without being disseminated, the very substance of creation is tainted. Thus, in the particular case of literature, to prohibit means simultaneously (Korolitski) a professional punishment. What can freedom of expression refer to in the case of a writer who has no right to publish? Guaranteeing this freedom seems to involve the prerequisite that the writer should be allowed to publish his texts, in other words, to disseminate, through publishing, his ideas, visions and conceptions, expressed in writing. If the work is not published and disseminated, the writer is not left with any relevant artistic space of self-expression. It turns out that prohibition has (in the case of the writer) a much more precarious legislative basis, by comparison. Whether what is punishable is the publication of an idea, or the idea itself, taken separately, each of them is insufficient to explain the prohibition. In fact, banning a book means withdrawing tolerance before (culpable) acts are committed; in other words, it means punishing a misdemeanour of opinion.

5. The perverse effects of censorship

Censorship has never been able to ban something permanently. However, unlike the work of art, which has no direct consequences on behaviours, censorship is harmful and produces paradoxical perverse effects. Among them, the following can be listed:

The presence of talent intensifies the act of censorship

The dangers of literature, for example, are commensurate with the author’s talent. Works that later entered the universal cultural heritage may have fallen victim to censorship on this account, while numerous other immoral writings remain unsanctioned legally, even though they are found to be morally reprehensible. Justice is not interested in them, because such writings do not enjoy sufficient notoriety.

Let us admit that this hinges on a limit of censorship, which is aware that it cannot eradicate or even control the (undesirable) phenomenon of pornography, so it tries to limit its public influence. That would explain the interest of censorship in artistic works authored by renowned writers. When such writings contain fragments that are “obscene” or “pornographic,” the influence they may exert on the public, given their prestige, is exponentially higher compared to the creations of specialized pornographers, which remain confined, as a rule, to their own niche of consumers. Such reasoning, invoked with good faith, reveals a logical stalemate: justice condemns (when it decides to do so) the works of great writers precisely because there is a presumption that they exceed the domain of literariness and touch on that of obscenity and pornography. The option to censor mainly these works and not the effervescent and reprehensible pornographic literature per se amounts, however, to an implicit recognition, in reverse, that their authors are genuine artists and not mere pornographers and that their works are, in fact, artistic, in spite of the accusation of pornography. Through the very act of accusing (only) genuine writers, judges seem to recognize the talent of those whom they condemn.

Censorship – an advertising machine

The counter-productive nature of censorship is illustrated by the fact that it often promotes the work it bans, by giving its fame (an “aura”) and increasing its audience. 25 It is not rare for censored works to benefit from a more efficient dissemination than through the official circuitry. The taste for transgression arouses interest in a product that would undoubtedly be less noticeable in the absence of censorship’s sterilizing intervention. A paradox rears its head: censorship accidentally grants (commercial) value to the prohibited work, in the sense that it manages to achieve exactly the opposite of what it intends: instead of delegitimizing, denouncing and limiting access to a banned artwork, censorship, on the contrary, enshrines and creates popularity, a halo, an additional attractiveness. 26 It has a promotional role, like that of a marketing campaign. To the extent that censorship has turned into a kind of involuntary advertising machine, one might say that it contains its own principle of self-destruction: by targeting an artwork, it augments its popularity. This amounts to a defeat for the official system, but for art it is a gain, a victory.

The confrontation between art and justice implies a constant, close and tense negotiation between the right to free expression, on the one hand, and the right to dignity (and identity), on the other. Both can be overstepped and there are situations in which they inconvenience/challenge each other. Therefore, the question whether art must be withdrawn from the social contract field is frequently reiterated. There is a persisting indecision regarding the question whether the freedom of art must be absolute or, on the contrary, if there should be limits to social permissiveness in relation to it. The current debate seems to indicate that relativism cannot be overcome. There are credible arguments on both sides. While we have an intuition that absolute immunity cannot be granted to art and literature, it is hard to argue convincingly in favour of judicial intervention to regulate this sensitive area of society. That is also because no good examples can be invoked, while errors and abuses abound.

The terms of this dilemma also constitute possible criteria according to which the complex and nuanced attitudes that have gained shape can be classified (simplifying, of course, the picture) into two opposed sets: one in favour of the unconditional, non-censurable, absolute freedom of art, and the other in favour of social control. The former brings together voices that say that the act of censorship is of a severity that is incompatible with the specificities of fiction, while the latter groups together opinions that art benefits from a laxity that verges on impunity. As Joel Gilles notes, each of the options is undermined by internal contradictions. If the answer to the need for control is no , it is equivalent to the notion of the insignificance of art and/or risks infantilizing the artist; art is done a disservice, being divested of the challenges that stimulate it (Gilles 21-22). In addition, making an exception for art means establishing an unacceptable conceptual hierarchy among the creations of the human spirit. 27 If, on the contrary, the answer is yes , by this we credit art with meanings that have implications beyond its limits. If you are censored, it means that your work has a social impact and that it is taken seriously. However, we concede that it must be subject to common rules, without claiming that it has the right to escape social prohibition. What complicates the picture even more is the fact that the plans overlap and the same arguments are used with a different purpose in the two camps.

2. The theory of necessary control

The will and even the need to supervise artists and their art are based on both aesthetic and moral arguments. The argument is that if society waived its right of control over art, all it would achieve, by this exception, would be to promote the intolerance it wishes to avoid, for it would deprive itself, in fact, of “the legal possibility of penalizing the expression of sexist, racist, anti-Semitic innuendoes...” (Collin, qtd. in Upinsky 49). The political dimension of art is difficult to ignore; that is why it is necessary that art should obey the general principles, codes and rules that govern the public space. The fictional character of art does not imply the absence of every form of control. In fact, the argument that art has nothing to do with reality because it tackles our subjective relationship with it is contradictory. To defend the impunity of the art, disconnecting it from its bond with reality, is counter-productive (in essence, it is a vulgarized and absurd use of the critical concept of “referential illusion”), since it entails obliterating the conception from which it simultaneously derives its value. An additional problem for the exemption of art from censorship would be the difficulty of defining the artistic object today.

i. The protection of minors

If I were to select an incontrovertible justification for the social control of art, it would undoubtedly refer to the protection of vulnerable groups. “Not everything can be shown to anyone; not all people are of age” (Burnet 37) is the basic principle, which might be defined by the protection of the vulnerable, in the name of their own “good”. Certain age categories (such as children or adolescents) must be protected not because there is something harmful in the content of art, but because it may be inadequate for insufficiently mature people to appreciate it properly. In fact, the criminal codes of most European countries provide for the prohibition of broadcasting materials likely to expose minors to cultural shocks, with predictable consequences that are nonetheless difficult to quantify. 28 The premise for this punishable restriction is that the censor is the voice of public interest. Appropriating the role of a parent, he exercises his profession only in relationship with the vulnerable members of society, to protect them from the undesirable consequences that they could become potential victims of. As a precaution, prevention action is required in their case. This is not a prohibition in the full sense of the term, but a contextual one, in order to preserve the innocence of children. The right to prohibit is based on the “fragility of the victim and not the harmfulness of the artist” (Burnet 40).

Excess can, however, compromise reasonable regulations of this kind. There is a tendency to gradually expand the circle of those who are considered “minors” and who need to be protected. Thus, the General Council of Var canceled Gloria Friedman’s exhibition, scheduled for December 2000, expressing the fear that what would be shown “would be incongruous with public expectations” (Burnet 40-45). In her commentary, Eliane Burnet shows that, behind the apparent respect for democratic rights, there hides a double contempt: one towards the public, considered unable to bear/tolerate anything that deviates from their expectations, but also a contempt for the artist, who becomes a kind of service provider, meeting (solely) the expectations of the public. The arrogance of politicians, who believe that “by a sort of state-granted grace, when they reach positions of power, they become able to appreciate what is good, in matters of art, for their fellow citizens” (Burnet 39), turns, in the best case scenario, into an excellent tool for the promotion of conformist, cliché art. The paternalism of censorship spills into partisan protectionism.

The notion of a symbolic minority (the idea that the lack of appropriate instruction renders one fragile and that, by contrast, education makes us immune to the possible negative influences of art) can also motivate other behaviours, driven by the fantasy of an “enlightened” elite. Luxury editions of books 29 or the prohibitive prices of certain products/artistic productions represent such a solution which paradoxically capitalizes, nowadays, on the Aristotelian theory of the two publics: elitist/professional/erudite and popular/amateurish/ignorant. The risk of manipulation present in this approach is illustrated by Pierre Bourdieu in the oxymoronic paradox of “enlightened obscurantism”.

ii. Censorship as a contrastive element necessary to art

To affirm that art and censorship form a dialectical couple amounts to postulating that art is edified under coercion (through confrontation). In the absence of censorship, the necessary fertile tension no longer accumulates. The ultimate consequence would be that we need to maintain censorship, because in its absence there would also be no place for anti-censorship discourse. If we examine the consequences of its suppression, censorship appears to be, paradoxically, necessary in art, says Eliane Burnet (Burnet 45). In other words, boundaries are needed for transgression to exist. “Censors,” says Thomas Schlesser, “attest to the power of art and the fears that it can induce: they make creators face their own responsibility, compelling them to resistance and transgression” (Schlesser 9). Transgression itself is the pole a dialectical couple, formed with the idea of constraint/regulation/norm, etc. Transgression loses its raison d'être if all regulatory forms are abolished and they can no longer stir the temptation to transgress.

The argument uses Toynbee’s challenge theory: fighting the enemy fortifies you, makes you ingenious. More precisely, censorship stimulates invention, forcing the artist to find subtler means of expression. “In art history,” says George Steiner, “one can see a correlation between the value of works of art and the violence exerted by the powers to be: the greater the coercion, the more alive the art. Hence the terrible conclusion that the greatest works of art were born out of the greatest tyrannies” (Burnet 48). Thus, a cycle sets in: subversion and transgression are the engine of art, which tests the fragility of order, which requires censorship.

iii. Censorship as a form of value selection

Often the censorship/anti-censorship dialectics is part of a complex system of exchanges at different levels of the cultural field, through which a selection/evaluation process is carried out. Integrated into this mechanism, censorship clarifies what is legitimate and what is not in a culture (Kidd x).

iv. Censorship: a cultural ferment

Although too rarely stressed, there is a cultural gain which consists in the enrichment and globalization of thinking caused by the migrations of authors who were ostracized in their home countries: “Forced exile constitutes a source of exchanges, strengthening the impact of thought that was intended to be suppressed and expanding its area of influence” (Goedert 13).

The experience of totalitarian regimes shows an amplification of the role of art. Having an ideologically constrained trajectory, words are charged with new symbolic and aesthetic meanings that reverberate socially.

v. Censorship: an artistic catalyst

Censorship becomes participatory, assisting to complement and sometimes to enhance the suppleness of the work. The quality of art increases through the act of censorship. 30 It has been argued (especially in the case of literature) that the changes demanded by censors can be beneficial to the aesthetic value of a book, contributing indirectly to the enrichment of its imaginary universe. By a principle of amputation, writers sharpen their expressive acuity, refining their style. 31 The obstacles to censorship are thus thwarted by poetic means. “Censorship,” Petre Răileanu comments, “works as a fuel of imagination and grants meaning to subversion” (Răileanu 7). Although possible, 32 the valorisation of these side effects of censorship ignores the overwhelming multitude of authors’ testimonies about the opposite outcome. The work does not come out clarified/purified from the fire of censorship but, on the contrary, it emerges stunted and deformed, ideologically diminished and, implicitly, aesthetically mutilated.

It seems reasonable to lay emphasis on the term “side” when we talk about the “beneficial side effects “of censorship. It is not in the interest of censorship to stimulate creativity. On the contrary, its goals are mainly, if not entirely, destructive. Therefore, to argue that censorship as a status quo can produce these beneficial aesthetic results is an exaggeration or a non-sense.

Each of the above allegations has been met with opinions to the contrary.

The reasoning according to which art is reformed, out of necessity, when subjected to coercion is false. In fact, this is a sophism that introduces, through the back door, a prejudice against transgressive art, whose acts are regarded as gratuitous. The premise is tendentious against protesting writers, who are portrayed as arrested in a permanent act of reiterated rebellion. However, the artists’ revolt against totalitarian censorship, for example, is not an end in itself, but a reaction against restrictions that are felt to be dangerous for art and for the guaranteed freedoms of the individual. Liberators would not be needed if there were no oppressive bans. The relationship between censorship and transgression could be described, rather, as an arms race, as a ceaseless competition that generates refinements in both parties, both in the oppressor and in the oppressed.

In the same way, a perverse effect is that marginal artistic voices must become ever more ingenious, being forced to refine their discourse (including from an aesthetic point of view), so as to be heard and acknowledged. It is counter-intuitive to argue that artistic refinement would not have been possible otherwise. Subversive authors (a possible typology, because not all artists are militant) would prefer there not to exist censorship, and their main purpose is precisely to eliminate it in order to be able to freely express their own ideas.

I am inclined to think that there is no “good” censorship in literature, just the side effects of sterilizing interventions. 33 Paradoxically, those who defend censorship, emphasizing its positive effects, condemn it radically. Whatever possible beneficial consequences may emerge are involuntary, strengthening in fact the negative essence of censorship. Through its arbitrary interventions, art is disfigured and constrained to become, in turn, compatible with a deformity that is fundamentally foreign to itself.

vi. Censorship as incitement to freedom

The defence of censorship reaches the apogee in the form of a paradox: not only does it ensure the protection of culture (and, implicitly, of human dignity), but censorship also becomes an incitement to freedom. Defining the “frontier between what is allowed and what is forbidden, it outlines a space of freedom, which is less destabilizing as the no man’s land of ‘everything is allowed’”. 34 Censorship would therefore safeguard the beneficent rules for the community, the rules that are necessary for the proper functioning of society. If there are no more rules (prohibitions) to defy, then it is not freedom that acquires expression, but barbarity, anarchy, nothingness. The distinction between public and private is exploded and, with it, the differences that structure the cultural and social space disappear. As for art, it is allegedly subject to a levelling, flattening effect. The loss of the halo, the disappearance of the “auratic” dimension of the work of art reduces it to the status of mere commodity, vulgarized by mechanical reproduction. For Jean-Paul Curnier, the absence of censorship is tantamount to the disappearance of the right to criticism: “The total refusal of censorship risks becoming the prohibition to express revulsion, disgust, rejection, when the ignominy of the image is not a sign of aesthetic value,” and the “inability to express a critical judgment” (Curnier 65, qtd. in Burnet 47).

For art, a series of practical inconveniences arise from the common-sensical assertion of socially indispensable norms. When it comes to their enforcement, it is difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish between the standards understood as simple behavioural cues that are acceptable (even laudable and inspiring) and, respectively, rules that are perceived as unfair, discretionary and oppressive, with an inhibiting effect on art. Not only censors, but also some artists walk the thin line between the two contradictory meanings.

As for axiological collapse and immunity to criticism, given the absence of any grounds for prohibition entailed by the (presumptive) abolition of censorship, I am afraid that the reasoning is similar to the one exposed by Žižek, who mentions, among the symptoms of consumerist society, the shift from happiness as the privilege to the “duty” to be happy. The latter acquires, like the freedom to which censorship incites the artist, a convulsive quality. Telling it all, confessing to everything is a kind of self-administered secret delight for writers. In this hypothetical case, it becomes an imperative drive, as tyrannical as that of prohibition, which was supposed to be removed.

3. The theory of the absolute freedom of art

Art is a fundamental good. It enriches the quality of life, diversifies thinking and expression. Cumulatively, the criticism of censorship leads to an encomiastic discourse, which affirms the right of art to a statute of extraterritoriality (where current rules and norms are suspended) and sacralises the artist. The museum is a possible prototypal example. The museum, says Eliane Burnet, “should be considered as a kind of foreign embassy with all the prerogatives of immunity and inviolability” (Burnet 41). Art, like the museum, is the enclave where one should not intervene to sterilize artworks, in the name of legal and/or moral considerations, and the artist is the beneficiary of a state of exceptionality. It is easy to see the romantic reflex in this option. 35 What is curious, however, is that art lays claim to a privileged status in a moment and in a (postmodern) context which tends, by virtue of trans-aesthetic definitions, to reach democratization and to transgress the borders between art and life. On the one hand, the concept of “spontaneous creativity” imposed by pop culture has democratized art, cancelling the “aesthetic distance” between art and non-art. On the other hand, in a contradictory manner, the new democratic art tends to simultaneously preserve the privileges of talent.

For the critics of censorship, things are therefore clear: freedom is constitutive of art, which, in turn, is vital for democracy. They demand thus the legal entrenchment of the artist’s privileged status and the recognition of the absolute freedom of creation as a fundamental freedom. 36 The argument is simple: tolerating freedom of expression is the only possible way forward, and art is able to resolve its own internal contradictions. For example, in cases where (see Dostoevsky) an authentic work of art carries with itself (also) a retrograde political message, such content is absorbed, suppressed and dialectically surpassed by the great artistic/aesthetic value of the whole. By contrast, the ultimate consequence of censorship is self-censorship . 37 This marks the defeat of the freedom of thought and imagination.

The claim that art and artists should have an exceptional status conjures up arguments from two different registers.

i. The transgressions of art

The association between art and transgression has been strengthened by the emergence of the culture of originality, which promotes the “interesting” new (defined not just as something unprecedented, but also as something that is “captivating,” “enlightening” even). The classical tradition of praising prestigious canons and established conventions has been replaced, starting with romanticism, by a poetics of transgression, which violates norms, in both aesthetic and moral terms. Frequently, art violates some prohibitions. Aesthetically, the work of art dynamites the old cultural preserves, generating new ones, which will be challenged, in their turn, at a fast pace. 38 Contemporary art has a strong experimental character (corresponding to the increasingly liberal character of society) and promotes an aesthetic of shock. Simultaneously, art is transgressive also in relation to the whole network of social norms and conventions, which it constantly provokes, pushing it into crisis, in the hope of forcing its resurrection. What if, asks Thomas Schlesser, given the generalized moral and social anaesthesia, “in order to awaken consciousness, art is condemned to step outside the law?” (Schlesser 199). Numerous contemporary artists uphold, in any case, the irreverent nature of creation. 39 Conversely, genuine censorship imposes norms that are not only ideological, but also formal, consubstantial to art, which means that the moral ban on the work is simultaneously an artistic one. As for the artist, he has a history of violating prohibitions. He was declared a professional of transgression (Anthony Julius). It is considered, however, that, unlike a criminal, who is guilty of transgressing social and moral order, the artist’s transgression is creative, culturally productive.

Therefore, the need for the freedom of artistic expression is drawn from the very (alleged) transgressive nature of art. For over a century, transgression has been at the very core of art. It is art’s generating engine. Hence, the question arises whether there can be punishable transgressions in its case, without annihilating its specificity (its emblematic characteristic, its distinctive status)?

ii. The futility of censorship

Equally paradoxical is the second argument. The inefficiency of censorship, in the case of art, requires that it should be relinquished, not only because it is undemocratic and inopportune, but also because it is futile. Art is immune to censorship, because fiction eludes it through allegory, metaphor, metonymy, allusion and so on.

As a respondent to the survey on “Censorship and Books” published by Magazine Litteraire in 1920, Borges seems to have amused himself with a deliberately contentious response. He asserted that censorship was not the unanimously feared enemy of literature, but, on the contrary, an incapacitated/powerless adversary that used inefficient and somewhat rudimentary weapons. 40 Art tolerates censorship and has the resources to integrate and transform its sterilizing interventions, through metaphor and the poetics of incompleteness. Metaphor, Borges says, has always ensured artistic success through an extraordinary poetic intuition. Poetry is, by definition, transfiguration. It produces a quasi-alchemical transmutation of reality. A text that does not reach the level of metaphor (including as a structural trope) is not literature. The value of art lies (even for a poet of transparency like Whitman) in metaphorical language, which renders the text intangible to censorship. In fact, censorship responds and can react to the crude language, 41 to unrefined expression, which is clearly provoking. However, one does not need to be either unpolished or unconventional to say what one means, using the language of art. According to this reasoning, it appears that censorship targets those literary texts (or fragments thereof) that forsake their artistic status through non-transfiguration.

Censorship is, in Borges’s view, irrelevant also from the perspective of a poetics of incompleteness. It is condemned by thinkers like Schopenhauer, for whom the literary text is sacrosanct and untouchable. In reality, it must be regarded, however, as an endlessly reworkable draft. All writers, Borges says (resorting to a Platonic-Jungian conceptual scaffolding), copy, reshuffle, rearrange the Great Universal Text, succeeding only in part to give shape to those non-sensible Ideas. Each literary work is an always already erroneous version of the archetypal Text. 42 At this scale of vision, the impotence of censorship becomes obvious.

The truth is that Borges resorts to a poetic license. His declaration of acceptance of censorship takes the form of a metaphor eulogizing literature. The artist and his poetry are elevated to an area that is inaccessible to censorship. Despite all attempts at corseting it, art triumphs. Censorship can be defeated simply by ignoring it.

4. The difficulty of slipping through the horns of the dilemma

The bibliography of the problem indicates that the theme of censorship in art is a reason for permanent controversy. Although both positions taken in the dispute are comprehensible and compelling from the perspective of the ideology assumed by each, all these interpretations are undermined by various problems. The repeated failure to produce an impeccable volley of arguments can also be motivated by the collective emotional climate. The pathos that surrounds debates often makes them obscure and inoperative. There is no neutral space in which the battling ideas can be analysed, no (supraordinate) authentic court to arbitrate the conflict, only biased parties that dispute their supremacy.

There is no disagreement on which the rational camps might reach an agreement. Censorship is generally considered bad because it suppresses ideas and works. To claim that all actions against it are good would, however, be a reductionist fallacy. The recommendation to take account of paradigmatic examples in order to arrive at an adequate definition of censorship is incompatible with the disagreement generated by controversial cases. To use the same word for one and the other risks making the (traditional) concept of censorship inoperative. The desire to avoid lexical tricks (which push the problem one step behind, without solving it) raises questions about which moves are permissible and which ones are not in the effort to define censorship.

There is no trenchant response that might disarm all camps simultaneously. The final verdict must be suspended, because previous answers to the components of the issue under discussion could not be clarified/elucidated, resulting in endless (and sometimes implicit) attempts to define censorship.

In this dilemmatic context, it is difficult (even impossible) to answer the question if there is any solid reason why art should (not) be censored. For art is placed in the interval. Its position is problematic in any society. Ideally, it should be recognized that art has a status of its own and there should be a provisional (albeit unstable) balance. We would like to believe that there are beneficial forms of censorship, backed by the complementarity between Good, Law and Truth. However, if we stay true to reality and do not fall for utopia, we must recognize that censorship is repugnant since it is perceived as a means that contributes to the consolidation of power. The fact is that societies in which political power wants to turn art into its own instrument, there are always ways to regulate its privileges and limits, thus establishing censorship. Still, censorship cannot achieve infallibility. Art always finds remedies, means to express, in different ways, whatever censorship is trying to ban. Therefore, a dynamic dialectic has set in between various types of censorship and various forms of transgression/subversion. The themes of this confrontation are historically redefined, each era displaying its own spectrum of confrontation scenarios.

The issue of the immunity of art oscillates between the Scylla of excessive prohibitions and the Charybdis of some “Trojan horses” (vectors through which, it is believed, works of art carry messages with a socially toxic potential). Not only do the excesses of art cause a need for civic control, but they also fuel the excesses of censorship. The reverse holds true as well. In between the more extreme cases placed at the edge of the spectrum (the happiness or the unhappiness of art due to censorship or non-censorship) are the everyday situations, in which art is punished, gently or harshly, for its audacities. Permanently at work (including in liberal societies) is the silent censorship of an “anonymous authority” (Erich Fromm), which most often evinces a conservatism that is instinctively opposed to art’s liberties, especially to those verging on libertinism.

Translated into English by Carmen Borbely

References :

Bartel, Christopher. “The Fine Art of Pornography? The Conflict Between Artistic Value and Pornographic Value.” Porn – Philosophy for Everyone: How to Think with Kink , edited by Dave Monroe. Wiley-Blackwell, 2010: 153-165.

Baudrillard, Jean. L ’ Echange symbolique et la mort . Gallimard, 1976.

Berger, Fred. “Pornography, Sex, and Censorship.” Social Theory and Practice , 4 (1977): 183-209.

Bovens, Luc. “Moral Luck, Photojournalism, and Pornography.” Journal of Value Inquiry 32 (1998): 205-217.

Brochier, Jean-Jacques, “Les arguments contre la censure.” Communications , 9 (1967) : 64-74. DOI : https://doi.org/10.3406/comm.1967.1129

Bruyere, Claire, and Henriette Touillier-Feybrabend. “La censure et ses masques.” Ethnologie francaise , vol. 36, no. 1, 2006.

Chiurato, Andrea. “«L’érotisme des autres»: phénoménologie de la pornographie chez Robbe-Grillet.” www.revue-analyses.org , vol. 7, no. 1, hiver 2012: 177-198

Clark, Kenneth. The Nude: A Study in Ideal Beauty . John Murray, 1956.

Danto, Arthur C. The Abuse of Beauty: Aesthetics and the Concept of Art . Open Court, 2003.

Domenach, Jacques (ed.). Censure, autocensure et art d ’ écrire. De l ’ Antiquité à nos jours. Editions Complexe, 2005.

Durand, Pascal, Accardo, Alain. Médias et censure, figures de l ’ ortodoxie . Editions de l’ULG, 2004.

Elliott, George P. “Against Pornography.” Perspectives on Pornography , edited by Douglas Hughes. St Martin’s Press, 1970: 72-95.

Ellis, Havelock. Studies in the Psychology of Sex: Volume 4. Bibliobazaar, 2007.

Essche, Eric Van (ed.). Le Sens de l ’ Indecence. La question de la censure des images a l ’ âge contemporain . La Lettre volée, 2005.

Fish, Stanley. There’s No Such Thing as Free Speech and It’s a Good Thing, Too . Oxford University Press, 1994.

Frederick, Danny. “Pornography and Freedom.” KRITIKE , volume V, no. 2 (December 2011): 84-95.

Glucksmann, André. “La métacensure.” Communications , vol. 9, no. 1, 1967.

Goedert, Nathalie (ed.). Censure et liberté: attein t ou protection?. Presses Universitaires de Sceaux, L’Harmattan, 2011.

Graham, Gordon. “Sex and Violence in Fact and Fiction. “ Media-Ethics , edited by Matthew Kieran. Routledge, 2008: 152-164.

Huer, Jon. Art, Beauty, and Pornography: A Journey Through American Culture . Prometheus, 1987.

Jacobsen, Carol. “Redefining Censorship. A Feminist View.” Art Journal , winter, 1991.

Julius, Anthony. Transgressions. The Offences of Art. Thames & Hudson L , 2002.

Kidd, Kenneth. “Not Censorship but Selection.” Censorship and/as Prising , 2 December 2008.

Kieran, Matthew. “Pornographic Art.” Philosophy and Literature 25 (2001): 31-45.

---. “On Obscenity: The Thrill and Repulsion of the Morally Prohibited.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (2002): 31-55.

Korolitski, Ulysse. “Les justifications de la censure.” Raisons politiques , 2005/1, no. 17.

Langton, Rae. “Speech Acts and Unspeakable Acts.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 22 (1993): 305-330.

Lefrère, Jean-Jacques, and Michel Pierssens (eds.). La Censure , Du Lérot, 2006.

Levinson, Jerrold. “Erotic Art.” The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy , edited by E. Craig. Routledge, 1998: 406-9.

Llosa, Vargas. Adevărul minciunilor . Ed. Alfa, 1999.

Maes, Hans. “Art and Pornography.” Journal of Aesthetic Education 43 (2009): 107-116.

---. “Art or Porn: Clear Division or False Dilemma?” Philosophy and Literature 35 (1), 2011: 51-64.

---. “Drawing the Line: Art versus Pornography.” Philosophy Compass , 6(6), 2011: 385–397.

Mag Uidhir, Christy. “Why Pornography Can’t Be Art.” Philosophy and Literature 33 (2009):193-203.

Mahon, Alyce. Eroticism & Art . Oxford University Press, 2005.

Malița, Liviu. “Cazul Brâncuși. Definițiile tradiționale ale artei.” Extremele artei , Ed. Accent, 2010: 8-27.

Marcus, Steven. The Other Victorians: A Study of Sexuality and Pornography in Mid-Nineteenth-Century England . Basic Books, 1964.

Mey, Kerstin. Art & Obscenity . I.B.Tauris, 2007.

Michelson, Peter. Speaking the Unspeakable: A Poetics of Obscenity . State University of New York Press, 1993.

Müller, Beate (ed.). Censorship and cultural regulation: Mapping the Territory . Critical Studies , October 2003.

Nabokov, Vladimir. “On a Book Entitled Lolita .” Lolita . Penguin, 1995: 311-317.

Nussbaum, Martha C. “Objectification.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 24 (1995): 249-291.

---. Hiding from Humanity: Disgust, Shame and the Law . Princeton University Press, 2004.

Pauvert, Jean-Jacques. Nouveaux (et moins nouveaux) visages de la censure suivi de L ’ Affaire Sade. Les Belles Lettres, 1994.

Peckham, Morse. Art and Pornography: An Experiment in Explanation . Basic Books, 1969.

Rasson, Luc. L ’ Ecrivain et le Dictateur. Ecrire l’expérience totalitaire , IMAGO, 2008.

Saint-Martin, Isabelle. “Christ, Pietà; Cène, à laffiche: écart et transgression dans la publicité et le cinéma,” Ethnologie francaise , vol. 36, no. 1, 2006: 66-69.

Sapiro, Gisèle. La responsabilité de l ’ écrivain. Littérature, droit et morale en France (XIX e – XXI e siècle). Editions du Seuil, 2011.

Schlesser, Thomas. L ’ art face à la censure. Cinq siècle d ’ interdits et de résistances . Editions Beaux Arts, 2011.

Schopenhauer, Arthur. The World as Will and Representation . Volume 1. Trans. E.F.J. Payne. Dover, 1965.

Scruton, Roger. “Flesh from the Butcher: How to Distinguish Eroticism from Pornography.” Times Literary Supplement , 15 April 2005: 11-13.

---. Beauty . Oxford University Press, 2009.

Sherman, Jeffrey G. “Love Speech: The Social Utility of Pornography.” Stanford Law Review , vol. 47, April 1995: 661-705.

Shusterman, Richard. “Aesthetic Censorship: Censoring Art for Art s Sake.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 43, No. 2 (1984): 171-180.

---. “Aesthetic Experience: From Analysis to Eros.” Aesthetic Experience , edited by Richard Shusterman & Adele Tomlin. Routledge, 2008: 79-97.

Sontag, Susan. “The Pornographic Imagination.” Styles of Radical Will . Vintage, 1994: 35-73.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to footer
• Advocacy & Policy
• Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion
• Learn & Tools
• Opportunities
• Collaborate

Censorship and the Arts

The freedom to create and to experience works of art is essential to our democracy. At present this freedom is under attack.

May 16, 2019

Private groups and public leaders in various parts of the nation are attempting to remove certain artworks from public display, to censor exhibitions, to label particular works as “controversial”, and to identify some artworks and artists as “objectionable”. These actions arise from a view that censorship is needed in order to avoid the subversion of politics and the corruption of morals.

Moreover, it is not only artworks that are being subjected to efforts at suppression. These efforts are related to a larger pattern of pressure being brought against education, the press, film, and television. It is important to note that even when such efforts do not actually suppress particular types of expression, they cast a shadow of fear which leads to voluntary curtailment of expression by those who seek to avoid controversy. The arts cannot thrive in such a climate of fear.

Art educators should be deeply concerned over efforts at any kind of suppression of works of art. Freedom of expression is guaranteed by the Constitution. This freedom of expression includes both verbal expression—speech and writing; and non-verbal expression, which includes the “language” of the various arts.

Free communication is essential to the preservation of a free society and a creative culture. Now, as always in our history, artworks—literature, theatre, painting, sculpture, music, and dance, are among our most effective instruments of freedom. They are powerful means for making available ideas, feelings, social growth, the envisioning of new possibilities for humankind, solutions to problems, and the improvement of human life.

On the other hand, suppression of ideas and of artistic expression leads to conformity, the limiting of diversity of expression to a narrow range of “acceptable” forms, and the stifling of freedom.

As art educators in a free society, we confirm the following:

• Freedom of expression in the arts must be preserved.
• The individual has the right to accept or reject any work of art for himself or herself personally, but does not have the right to suppress those works of art to which he or she may object or those artists with whom he or she does not agree. The free individual and the free society do not need a censor to tell what should be acceptable or unacceptable, and should not tolerate such censorship. All censorship is contrary to democratic principles.
• It is the duty of the art educator to confront students with a diversity of art experiences and to enable students to think critically. The art educator need not like or endorse all images, ideologies, and artists he or she makes available to students, but should allow the individual student to choose from among widely conflicting images, opinions, and ideologies. While some works of art may indeed be banal and trivial, and some works may be repugnant and unacceptable to some individuals, the art educator should insist upon the right of every individual to freely express and create in his or her own way and to experience, accept, or reject any particular work of art.
• The art educator should impress upon students the vital importance of freedom of expression as a basic premise in the free democratic society and urge students to guard against any efforts to limit or curtail that freedom.

Adoption : Adopted by the National Art Education Association Board of Directors Motion #17, September, 1991

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on Pinterest
• Share via email

Explore More

Read More from NAEA

May 9, 2024

NAEA Professional Learning Studio

Professional learning from anywhere in the world! Access live and on demand webinars, workshops, and more. Earn professional development credit or university credit!

National Art Education Foundation

The National Art Education Foundation (NAEF) invests in innovative initiatives to support instructional practice, research, and leadership in visual arts education.

Connect with Us

National Arts Education Association

901 Prince Street Alexandria , VA 22314

T elephone : +1 800 . 299 . 8321 +1 703 . 860 . 8000

F ax : fax +1 703 . 860 . 2960

E mail : info[at]arteducators.org

Quick links

• National Art Honor Societies
• Accessibility

Freedom of Expression in the Arts and Entertainment

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT

In the late 1980s, state prosecutors brought a criminal obscenity charge against the owner of a record store for selling an album by the rap group, 2 Live Crew. Although this was the first time that obscenity charges had ever been brought against song lyrics, the 2 Live Crew case focused the nation’s attention on an old question: should the government ever have the authority to dictate to its citizens what they may or may not listen to, read, or watch?

American society has always been deeply ambivalent about this question. On the one hand, our history is filled with examples of overt government censorship, from the 1873 Comstock Law to the 1996 Communications Decency Act. Anthony Comstock, head of the Society for the Suppression of Vice, boasted 194,000 “questionable pictures” and 134,000 pounds of books of “improper character” were destroyed under the Comstock Law — in the first year alone. The Communications Decency Act imposed an unconstitutional censorship scheme on the Internet, accurately described by a federal judge as “the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed.”

On the other hand, the commitment to freedom of imagination and expression is deeply embedded in our national psyche, buttressed by the First Amendment, and supported by a long line of Supreme Court decisions.

Provocative and controversial art and in-your-face entertainment put our commitment to free speech to the test. Why should we oppose censorship when scenes of murder and mayhem dominate the TV screen, when works of art can be seen as a direct insult to peoples’ religious beliefs, and when much sexually explicit material can be seen as degrading to women? Why not let the majority’s morality and taste dictate what others can look at or listen to?

The answer is simple, and timeless: a free society is based on the principle that each and every individual has the right to decide what art or entertainment he or she wants — or does not want — to receive or create. Once you allow the government to censor someone else, you cede to it the the power to censor you, or something you like. Censorship is like poison gas: a powerful weapon that can harm you when the wind shifts.

Freedom of expression for ourselves requires freedom of expression for others. It is at the very heart of our democracy.

SEXUAL SPEECH

Sex in art and entertainment is the most frequent target of censorship crusades. Many examples come to mind. A painting of the classical statue of Venus de Milo was removed from a store because the managers of the shopping mall found its semi-nudity “too shocking.” Hundreds of works of literature, from Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings to John Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath, have been banned from public schools based on their sexual content.

A museum director was charged with a crime for including sexually explicit photographs by Robert Mapplethorpe in an art exhibit.

American law is, on the whole, the most speech-protective in the world — but sexual expression is treated as a second-class citizen. No causal link between exposure to sexually explicit material and anti-social or violent behavior has ever been scientifically established, in spite of many efforts to do so. Rather, the Supreme Court has allowed censorship of sexual speech on moral grounds — a remnant of our nation’s Puritan heritage.

This does not mean that all sexual expression can be censored, however. Only a narrow range of “obscene” material can be suppressed; a term like “pornography” has no legal meaning . Nevertheless, even the relatively narrow obscenity exception serves as a vehicle for abuse by government authorities as well as pressure groups who want to impose their personal moral views on other people.

IS MEDIA VIOLENCE A THREAT TO SOCIETY?

Today’s calls for censorship are not motivated solely by morality and taste, but also by the widespread belief that exposure to images of violence causes people to act in destructive ways. Pro-censorship forces, including many politicians, often cite a multitude of “scientific studies” that allegedly prove fictional violence leads to real-life violence.

There is, in fact, virtually no evidence that fictional violence causes otherwise stable people to become violent. And if we suppressed material based on the actions of unstable people, no work of fiction or art would be safe from censorship. Serial killer Theodore Bundy collected cheerleading magazines. And the work most often cited by psychopaths as justification for their acts of violence is the Bible.

But what about the rest of us? Does exposure to media violence actually lead to criminal or anti-social conduct by otherwise stable people, including children, who spend an average of 28 hours watching television each week? These are important questions. If there really were a clear cause-and-effect relationship between what normal children see on TV and harmful actions, then limits on such expression might arguably be warranted.

WHAT THE STUDIES SHOW

Studies on the relationship between media violence and real violence are the subject of considerable debate. Children have been shown TV programs with violent episodes in a laboratory setting and then tested for “aggressive” behavior. Some of these studies suggest that watching TV violence may temporarily induce “object aggression” in some children (such as popping balloons or hitting dolls or playing sports more aggressively) but not actual criminal violence against another person.

CORRELATIONAL STUDIES that seek to explain why some aggressive people have a history of watching a lot of violent TV suffer from the chicken-and-egg dilemma: does violent TV cause such people to behave aggressively, or do aggressive people simply prefer more violent entertainment? There is no definitive answer. But all scientists agree that statistical correlations between two phenomena do not mean that one causes the other.

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS are no more helpful. Japanese TV and movies are famous for their extreme, graphic violence, but Japan has a very low crime rate — much lower than many societies in which television watching is relatively rare. What the sudies reveal on the issue of fictional violence and real world aggression is — not much.

The only clear assertion that can be made is that the relationship between art and human behavior is a very complex one. Violent and sexually explicit art and entertainment have been a staple of human cultures from time immemorial. Many human behavioralists believe that these themes have a useful and constructive societal role, serving as a vicarious outlet for individual aggression.

WHAT DOES ARTISTIC FREEDOM INCLUDE?

The Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment’s protection of artistic expression very broadly. It extends not only to books, theatrical works and paintings, but also to posters, television, music videos and comic books — whatever the human creative impulse produces.

Two fundamental principles come into play whenever a court must decide a case involving freedom of expression. The first is “content neutrality”– the government cannot limit expression just because any listener, or even the majority of a community, is offended by its content. In the context of art and entertainment, this means tolerating some works that we might find offensive, insulting, outrageous — or just plain bad.

The second principle is that expression may be restricted only if it will clearly cause direct and imminent harm to an important societal interest. The classic example is falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater and causing a stampede. Even then, the speech may be silenced or punished only if there is no other way to avert the harm.

WHERE DO THE EXPERTS AGREE?

Whatever influence fictional violence has on behavior, most expert believe its effects are marginal compared to other factors. Even small children know the difference between fiction and reality, and their attitudes and behavior are shaped more by their life circumstances than by the books they read or the TV they watch. In 1972, the U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior released a 200-page report, “Television and Growing Up: The Impact of Televised Violence,” which concluded, “The effect [of television] is small compared with many other possible causes, such as parental attitudes or knowledge of and experience with the real violence of our society.” Twenty-one years later, the American Psychological Association published its 1993 report, “Violence & Youth,” and concluded, “The greatest predictor of future violent behavior is a previous history of violence.” In 1995, the Center for Communication Policy at UCLA, which monitors TV violence, came to a similar conclusion in its yearly report: “It is known that television does not have a simple, direct stimulus-response effect on its audiences.”

Blaming the media does not get us very far, and, to the extent that diverts the public’s attention from the real causes of violence in society, it may do more harm than good.

WHICH MEDIA VIOLENCE WOULD YOU BAN?

A pro-censorship member of Congress once attacked the following shows for being too violent: The Miracle Worker, Civil War Journal, Star Trek 9, The Untouchables, and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. What would be left if all these kinds of programs were purged from the airwaves? Is there good violence and bad violence? If so, who decides? Sports and the news are at least as violent as fiction, from the fights that erupt during every televised hockey game, to the videotaped beating of Rodney King by the LA Police Department, shown over and over gain on prime time TV. If we accept censorship of violence in the media, we will have to censor sports and news programs.

INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, INDIVIDUAL DECISIONS

The First Amendment is based upon the belief that in a free and democratic society, individual adults must be free to decide for themselves what to read, write, paint, draw, see and hear. If we are disturbed by images of violence or sex, we can change the channel, turn off the TV, and decline to go to certain movies or museum exhibits.

We can also exercise our own free speech rights by voicing our objections to forms of expression that we don’t like. Justice Louis Brandeis’ advice that the remedy for messages we disagree with or dislike in art, entertainment or politics is “more speech, not enforced silence,” is as true today as it was when given in 1927.

Further, we can exercise our prerogative as parents without resorting to censorship. Devices now exist that make it possible to block access to specific TV programs and internet sites. Periodicals that review books, recordings, and films can help parents determine what they feel is appropriate for their youngsters. Viewing decisions can, and should, be made at home, without government interference.

PORNOGRAPHIC! INDECENT! OBSCENE!

Justice John Marshall Harlan’s line, “one man’s vulgarity is another’s lyric,” sums up the impossibility of developing a definition of obscenity that isn’t hopelessly vague and subjective. And Justice Potter Stewart’s famous assurance, “I know it when I see it,” is of small comfort to artists, writers, movie directors and lyricists who must navigate the murky waters of obscenity law trying to figure out what police, prosecutors, judges and juries will think.

The Supreme Court’s current definition of constitutionally unprotected Obscenity, first announced in a 1973 case called Miller v. California, has three requirements. The work must 1) appeal to the average person’s prurient (shameful, morbid) interest in sex; 2) depict sexual conduct in a “patently offensive way” as defined by community standards; and 3) taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

The Supreme Court has held that Indecent expression — in contrast with “obscenity” — is entitled to some constitutional protection, but that indecency in some media (broadcasting, cable, and telephone) may be regulated. In its 1978 decision in Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica, the Court ruled that the government could require radio and television stations to air “indecent” material only during those hours when children would be unlikely listeners or viewers. Broadcast indecency was defined as: “language that describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory activities or organs.” This vague concept continues to baffle both the public and the courts.

PORNOGRAPHY is not a legal term at all. Its dictionary definition is “writing or pictures intended to arouse sexual desire.” Pornography comes in as many varieties as the human sexual impulse and is protected by the First Amendment unless it meets the definition for illegal obscenity.

WHAT IS CENSORSHIP?

Censorship, the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are “offensive,” happens whenever some people succeed in imposing their personal political or moral values on others. Censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups. Censorship by the government is unconstitutional.

In contrast, when private individuals or groups organize boycotts against stores that sell magazines of which they disapprove, their actions are protected by the First Amendment, although they can become dangerous in the extreme. Private pressure groups, not the government, promulgated and enforced the infamous Hollywood blacklists during the McCarthy period. But these private censorship campaigns are best countered by groups and individuals speaking out and organizing in defense of the threatened expression.

Related Issues

• Free Speech

Stay Informed

Sign up to be the first to hear about how to take action.

By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU’s privacy statement.

Essay on Censorship Of Art And Artists

Students are often asked to write an essay on Censorship Of Art And Artists in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Censorship Of Art And Artists

What is censorship.

Censorship is when someone in power controls what artists can show or say in their work. It’s like when parents block certain TV channels from children. This can happen with paintings, books, music, and movies.

Why Censor Art?

Some people censor art because they think it’s not good for everyone. They might find it offensive or harmful. They want to protect society’s values and keep peace.

Effects on Artists

When art is censored, artists can feel silenced. They can’t share their full thoughts and feelings. This can make them sad or angry because they can’t express themselves.

Some say censorship is needed to keep people safe. Others argue that it stops free speech. This debate is about finding a balance between safety and freedom.

250 Words Essay on Censorship Of Art And Artists

Censorship is when someone in power controls what can be seen, heard, or read. This often happens with art and artists. People in charge might block or change parts of a song, a painting, a book, or a movie because they think it’s not suitable for others.

Sometimes, leaders believe that certain ideas or images are harmful or offensive. They might think that these could upset people or go against important values. So, they decide to censor these to protect society. But, this can stop artists from sharing their thoughts and feelings through their work.

When art is censored, artists can feel like they are not allowed to express themselves. This can make them scared to create new things. They might worry that their work will be changed or that they might get in trouble for what they make.

Art as Expression

Art is a way for people to share their ideas and tell stories about their lives. When we censor art, we lose the chance to learn about different views and experiences. This can make our world less colorful and interesting.

Censorship of art and artists is a tricky subject. It’s about finding a balance between keeping people safe and letting artists be free to express themselves. It’s important to talk about this and understand why it happens. Only then can we make sure that art stays alive and keeps helping us see the world in new ways.

500 Words Essay on Censorship Of Art And Artists

Censorship is when someone in power controls what can be seen, said, or heard by others. In the world of art, this means that certain pictures, songs, movies, or books might be changed or kept away from the public. People in charge might do this because they believe the art is not suitable for everyone, maybe because it shows something scary, uses bad language, or talks about sensitive topics.

There are a few reasons why art might be censored. Sometimes, it’s to protect young people from seeing things that are not right for their age. Other times, it’s because the art might offend or upset certain groups of people. Also, in some places, the government wants to make sure that only ideas they agree with are shared with the people.

When art is censored, the artists who make it can feel sad or angry. They want to share their thoughts and feelings through their art, and when they’re not allowed to, it can be very frustrating. It can also stop them from making a living if they can’t sell their art. Sometimes, it can even be dangerous for artists if their work upsets those in power.

Art as a Way of Sharing Ideas

Art is a powerful way to share ideas. A painting, a song, or a story can make people think about things in a new way. It can help people understand each other better and can even change how they see the world. When art is censored, it stops these ideas from spreading and can keep people from learning and growing.

What Happens When Art is Free?

When there’s no censorship, artists can create freely. This can lead to a lot of different kinds of art, some of which might be amazing and some of which might not be liked by everyone. But even if not all art is liked, the freedom to make it is important. It lets artists explore new ideas and share them with the world.

Is Censorship Ever Okay?

This is a tough question. Some people think that a little bit of censorship is okay to protect certain groups of people, like children. Others believe that all art should be free, no matter what. There’s no easy answer, and different countries and cultures have different rules about what’s okay and what’s not.

Censorship of art and artists is a topic that can cause a lot of debates. On one side, it’s about keeping people safe from things that might harm them. On the other side, it’s about freedom and the right to express oneself. Finding a balance between these two sides is not simple, and it’s something that societies have been trying to figure out for a very long time. It’s important for everyone, including students, to think about these issues and decide what they believe is right.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Censorship In Social Media
• Essay on Cellphone Usage While Driving
• Essay on Cell

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Visiting Sleeping Beauties: Reawakening Fashion?

You must join the virtual exhibition queue when you arrive. If capacity has been reached for the day, the queue will close early.

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History Essays

Saint petersburg.

Ewer and basin (lavabo set)

Probably made at Chisinau Court Workshop

Andrei Nikiforovich Voronikhin

Alexander Danilovich Menshikov (1673–1729)

Unknown Artist, Swiss, Austrian, or German, active Russia ca. 1703–4

Samuel Margas Jr.

The Empress Elizabeth of Russia (1709–1762) on Horseback, Attended by a Page

Attributed to Georg Christoph Grooth

Table snuffbox

Niello scenes after a print entitled Naufrage (Shipwreck) by Jacques de Lajoüe , published in Paris 1736

Voltaire (François-Marie Arouet) (1694–1778)

Jean Antoine Houdon

Imperial Porcelain Manufactory, St. Petersburg

Cup with cover and saucer

Two bottle coolers

Zacharias Deichman the Elder

Catherine II The Great, Empress of Russia

Jean-Baptiste Nini

Coffee service

Johan Henrik Blom

Tureen with cover

Tureen with cover and stand

Jacques-Nicolas Roettiers

Possibly by Pierre-François-Mathis de Beaulieu (for Jean Georges)

Pair of scallop-shell dishes

Sugar bowl (from a tea service)

Workshop of David Roentgen

Beaker and saucer

David Roentgen and Company in Saint Petersburg

Johann Friedrich Anthing

Drop-front desk (secrétaire à abattant or secrétaire en cabinet)

Attributed to Martin Carlin

Pair of Flintlock Pistols of Empress Catherine the Great (1729–1796)

Johan Adolph Grecke

Gardner Manufactory

Center table

Imperial Armory, Tula (south of Moscow), Russia

Female Shaman

Pair of vases

Nikolai Stepanovich Vereshchagin

Jugate busts of Czarevitch Paul and Maria Feodorovna of Russia

James Tassie

Wolfram Koeppe Department of European Sculpture and Decorative Arts, The Metropolitan Museum of Art

October 2003

The Birth of Saint Petersburg Russia, or “Muscovy” as it was often called, had rarely been considered a part of Europe before the reign of Czar Peter I (Piotr Alexeievich), known as Peter the Great (r. 1682–1725). His supremacy marked the beginning of the country’s “Westernization,” whereby the political, economic, and cultural norms of the western European monarchies would become the basis for “civilizing” Russia. A radical transformation was needed to launch Russia into the modern world, a transformation later called the Petrine Revolution. The young czar, feeling oppressed by the medieval traditions and ecclesiastical patriarchy of seventeenth-century Moscow, wanted to Westernize Russia in a hurry, defying the sluggish pace of history.

Saint Petersburg was born on May 16, 1703 (May 5 by the old Julian Russian calendar). On that day, on a small island on the north bank of the Neva River, Peter cut two pieces of turf and placed them cross-wise. The setting was inauspicious. The area was a swamp that remained frozen from early November to March, with an annual average of 104 days of rain and 74 days of snow. The army, under the command of Alexander Menshikov ( 1996.7 ), had conquered the region shortly before. To show his gratitude, the czar later appointed Menshikov the first governor-general of Saint Petersburg. The fortification of the territory kept the Swedish enemy at bay and secured for Russia permanent access to the Baltic Sea. The partially ice-free harbor would be crucial to further economic development. All buildings on the site were erected on wooden poles driven into the marshy, unstable ground. Stones were a rare commodity in Russia, and about as valuable as precious metals.

The Dutch name “Piterburkh” (later changed to the German version, “Petersburg”) embodied the czar’s fascination with Holland and its small-scale urban architecture. He disliked patriarchal court ceremony and felt at ease in the bourgeois domestic life that he experienced during his travels throughout Europe on “the Great Embassy” (1697–98). However, the primary purpose of this voyage was to acquire firsthand knowledge of shipbuilding—his personal passion—and to learn about progressive techniques and Western ideas.

The victory over the Swedish army at Poltava in June 1709 elevated Russia to the rank of a European power, no longer to be ignored. Peter triumphed: “Now with God’s help the final stone in the foundation of Saint Petersburg has been laid.” By 1717, the city’s population of about 8,000 had tripled, and grew to around 40,000 by the time of Peter’s death in 1725. Saint Petersburg had become the commercial, industrial, administrative, and residential “metropolis” of Russia. By the 1790s, it had surpassed Moscow as the empire’s largest urban vicinity and was hailed as the “Venice of the North,” an allusion to the waterway system around the local “Grand Canal,” the Neva River.

Peter the Great’s Successors The short reign of Peter’s second wife, Empress Catherine I (r. 1725–27), who depended on her long-time favorite Menshikov, saw the reinstatement of the luxurious habits of the former imperial household. The archaic and ostentatious court display in the Byzantine tradition  that Peter had so despised was now to be restored under the pretext of glorifying his legacy. Enormous sums of money were lavished on foreign luxury items, demonstrating the court’s new international status and its observance of western European manners ( 68.141.133 ).

During the reigns of Empress Anna Ioannovna (r. 1730–40), niece of Peter I ( 1982.60.330a,b ), and her successor Elizabeth (Elizaveta Petrovna, r. 1741–62; 1978.554.2 ), Peter’s daughter, Saint Petersburg was transformed into a Baroque extravaganza through the talents of architect Bartolomeo Francesco Rastrelli (1700–1771) and other Western and Russian artisans. Foreign powers began to recognize Russia’s importance and competed for closer diplomatic relations. Foreign immigrants increased much faster than the local population, as scholars, craftsmen, artisans, and specialists of all kinds flocked to the country, and especially to Saint Petersburg ( 65.47 ; 1982.60.172,.173 ; 1995.327 ).

Catherine the Great (r. 1762–96) In a coup d’état assisted by the five Orloff brothers ( 33.165.2a–c ; 48.187.386,.387 ), Catherine II overthrew her husband, the ill-fated Peter III (r. 1762) and became empress. Catherine saw herself as the political heir of Peter the Great. A German-born princess of Anhalt-Zerbst who, after her marriage, became more Russian than any native, Catherine aimed at completing Peter’s legacy ( 52.189.11 ; 48.73.1 ). Having lived in isolation in the shadow of Elizabeth I since her marriage to the grand duke in 1745, the time had come to satisfy her thirst for life and her insatiable quest for culture and international recognition. An admirer of the Enlightenment and devoted aficionada of Voltaire’s writings, Catherine stimulated his cult in Russia ( 1972.61 ). In response, the French philosopher dedicated a poem to the czarina; her reply, dated October 15, 1763, initiated a correspondence that influenced the empress on many matters until Voltaire’s death in 1778. The hothouse cultural climate of Saint Petersburg during Catherine’s reign can be compared to the artistic and intellectual ferment in New York City in the second half of the twentieth century.

Catherine’s desire to enhance her fame and her claim to the throne was immortalized by her own witty play on words in Latin: “Petro Primo / Catharina Secunda” (To Peter the First / from Catherine the Second). This she had inscribed on the vast lump of granite in the form of a wave supporting the Bronze Horseman on the banks of the Neva in front of Saint Isaac’s Cathedral in Saint Petersburg. This triple-lifesize equestrian figure of Peter the Great took the French sculptor Falconet twelve years to complete, until it was finally cast—after three attempts—in 1782.

Catherine had military expansion plans for Russia and a cultural vision for its capital Saint Petersburg. Above all, she knew how to attract devoted supporters. Only nine days after the overthrow of her husband, Catherine wrote to Denis Diderot, offering to print his famous Encyclopédie , which had been banned in France. Catherine recognized the power of art to demonstrate political and social maturity. She acquired entire collections of painting ( Watteau , for example), sculpture, and objects. The empress avoided anything that could be called mediocre or small. With the help of sophisticated advisors, such as Prince Dmitrii Golitsyn, her ambassador in Paris, Denis Diderot, Falconet, and the illustrious Baron Friedrich Melchior von Grimm, the empress assembled the core of today’s State Hermitage Museum. Catherine favored luxury goods from all over Europe ( 33.165.2a–c ; 48.187.386,.387 ; 17.190.1158 ). She commissioned Sèvres porcelain and Wedgwood pottery as well as hundreds of pieces of ingeniously conceived furniture from the German manufactory of David Roentgen in Neuwied ( 48.73.1 ). Furthermore, she encouraged and supported Russian enterprises and craftsmen, like local silversmiths ( 47.51.1–.5 ; 1981.367.1,.2 ) and the Imperial Porcelain Manufactory ( 1982.60.171 ; 1982.60.177,.178 ; 1982.60.175 ), as well as privately owned manufactories ( 1982.60.158 ). Catherine especially liked the sparkling decorative products of the Tula armory steel workshop ( 2002.115 ), genuine Russian art forms with a fairy-tale-like appearance, and in 1775 merged her large collection of Tula objects with the imperial crown jewels in a newly constructed gallery at the Winter Palace in Saint Petersburg.

Catherine’s son and successor Paul I (Pavel Petrovich, r. 1796–1801) disliked his mother and her aesthetic sensibility ( 1998.13.1,.2 ). As grand duke, he had spent most of his time with his second wife Maria Feodorovna ( 1999.525 ) outside of Saint Petersburg, in Gatchina Palace and Pavlovsk Palace. These they transformed into the finest Neoclassical architectural gems in Europe ( 1976.155.110 ; 2002.115 ).

Koeppe, Wolfram. “Saint Petersburg.” In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History . New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/stpt/hd_stpt.htm (October 2003)

Further Reading

Cracraft, James. The Petrine Revolution in Russian Imagery . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.

Koeppe, Wolfram, and Marina Nudel. "An Unsuspected Bust of Alexander Menshikov." Metropolitan Museum Journal 35 (2000), pp. 161–77.

Shvidkovsky, Dmitri, and Alexander Orloff. St. Petersburg: Architecture of the Tsars . New York: Abbeville, 1995.

Additional Essays by Wolfram Koeppe

• Koeppe, Wolfram. “ Abraham and David Roentgen .” (June 2013)
• Koeppe, Wolfram. “ Hungarian Silver .” (February 2016)
• Koeppe, Wolfram. “ Collecting for the Kunstkammer .” (October 2002)

Related Essays

• Byzantium (ca. 330–1453)
• Sèvres Porcelain in the Nineteenth Century
• Abraham and David Roentgen
• Antoine Watteau (1684–1721)
• The Decoration of Arms and Armor
• East and West: Chinese Export Porcelain
• Edward Lycett (1833–1910)
• Empire Style, 1800–1815
• European Tapestry Production and Patronage, 1600–1800
• French Porcelain in the Eighteenth Century
• French Silver in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries
• From Italy to France: Gardens in the Court of Louis XIV and After
• German and Austrian Porcelain in the Eighteenth Century
• James McNeill Whistler (1834–1903)
• James McNeill Whistler (1834–1903) as Etcher
• The Neoclassical Temple
• Neoclassicism
• Northwest Coast Indians Musical Instruments
• Venice in the Eighteenth Century

List of Rulers

• List of Rulers of Europe
• Central Europe (including Germany), 1600–1800 A.D.
• Eastern Europe and Scandinavia, 1600–1800 A.D.
• France, 1600–1800 A.D.
• Iran, 1600–1800 A.D.
• Low Countries, 1600–1800 A.D.
• 17th Century A.D.
• 18th Century A.D.
• Architecture
• Baroque Art
• Eastern Europe
• French Literature / Poetry
• Gilt Silver
• Scandinavia

Artist or Maker

• Anthing, Johann Friedrich
• Beaulieu, Pierre-François-Mathis de
• Blom, Johan Henrik
• Bouillat, Edme François, I
• Carlin, Martin
• Chisinau Court Workshop
• Deichman, Zacharias, the Elder
• Feodorovna, Maria
• Gardner Factory
• Grecke, Johan Adolph
• Grooth, Georg Christoph
• Houdon, Jean Antoine
• Imperial Armory, Tula
• Imperial Porcelain Manufactory
• Lajoüe, Jacques de
• Margas, Samuel, Jr.
• Nini, Jean-Baptiste
• Prudhomme, Elie
• Roentgen, David
• Roettiers, Jacques-Nicolas
• Rotari, Pietro
• Sèvres Manufactory
• Tassie, James
• Vereshchagin, Nikolai Stepanovich
• Voronikhin, Andrei N.
• Watteau, Antoine

Online Features

• 82nd & Fifth: “Curls” by Wolfram Koeppe

113 Censorship Essay Topics & Examples

Looking for censorship topics for research papers or essays? The issue is controversial, hot, and definitely worth exploring.

🏆 Best Censorship Topic Ideas & Essay Examples

🚫 internet censorship essay topics, 📍 censorship research questions, 💡 easy censorship essay topics, 😡 controversial censorship topics to write about, ❓ research questions about censorship, 🙅 censorship topics for research paper.

Censorship implies suppression of public communication and speech due to its harmfulness or other reasons. It can be done by governments or other controlling bodies.

In your censorship essay, you might want to focus on its types: political, religion, educational, etc. Another idea is to discuss the reasons for and against censorship. One more option is to concentrate on censorship in a certain area: art, academy, or media. Finally, you can discuss why freedom of expression is important.

Whether you need to write an argumentative or informative essay on censorship, you’re in the right place. In this article, we’ve collected best internet censorship essay topics, title ideas, research questions, together with paper examples.

• Need for Internet Censorship and its Impact on Society The negative impacts of internet have raised many concerns over freedom of access and publishing of information, leading to the need to censor internet.
• Pros and Cons of Censorship of Pornography This is due to the fact that pornography is all about exploitation of an individual in maters pertaining to sex as well as violence exercised on females by their male counterparts.
• Literature Censorship in Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury The issues raised in the novel, Fahrenheit 451, are relevant in contemporary American society and Bradbury’s thoughts were a warning for what he highlighted is happening in the contemporary United States.
• Censorship in Advertising One of the most notorious examples is the marketing of drugs; pharmaceutical companies have successfully convinced a significant number of people that drugs are the only violable solution to their health problems.
• Censorship and the Arts in the United States The article titled “Censorship versus Freedom of Expression in the Arts” by Chiang and Posner expresses concerns that the government may illegitimately censor art to avoid corruption of morals and avoid subversion of politics.
• Censorship on Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury The main protagonist of the novel is Guy Montag, a fireman whose job like others, is to burn books without questioning the impact of his decision.
• Societal Control: Sanctions, Censorship, Surveillance The submission or agreeing to do according to the societal expectations and values are strong under the influence of both official and informal methods of control.
• Censorship and “13 Reasons Why” by Jay Asher Though the novel “13 Reasons Why” by Jay Asher could be seen as inappropriate for young adults, attempting to censor it would mean infringing upon the author’s right to self-expression and the readers’ right to […]
• Censorship of Films in the UAE Censorship of films in the United Arab Emirates is a major ethical dilemma as reflected in the case study analysis because the practice contravenes the freedom of media.
• ”Fahrenheit 451” by Ray Bradbury: Censorship and Independent Thinking By exploring the notion and censorship and how it affects people, the author draws parallels with the modern world of his time and the increasing impact of government-led propaganda. Censorship is a recurring theme that […]
• Censorship: For the People, or for Controlling The main aim for this art in our societies is to restrain and conceal beneath the disguise of defending the key fundamental public amenities that are; the State, families and churches.
• Self-Censorship of American Film Studios In this sense, the lack of freedom of expression and constant control of the film creations is what differs the 20th-century film studios from contemporary movie creators.
• Twitter and Violations of Freedom of Speech and Censorship The sort of organization that examines restrictions and the opportunities and challenges it encounters in doing so is the center of a widely acknowledged way of thinking about whether it is acceptable to restrict speech.
• Censorship by Big Tech (Social Media) Companies Despite such benefits, these platforms are connected to such evils as an addictive business model and a lack of control over the type of content that is accessible to children users.
• Freedom of Speech: Is Censorship Necessary? One of the greatest achievements of the contemporary democratic society is the freedom of speech. However, it is necessary to realize in what cases the government has the right to abridge the freedom of self-expression.
• Art and the Politics of Censorship in Literature The inclusion of the novel in classroom studies in the early 1960s especially 1963, spurred criticisms due to the issues of contention addressed by the novel.
• The Issue of Parents’ Censorship Filtering the sources of information by the adults is like growing the plants in the greenhouse, hiding them from all the dangers of the surrounding world.
• Art and the Politics of Censorship The final act of the film is the most vital of all the scenes because the subject of the dispute elucidates the disparities between the director, producer, and censors.
• Censorship of Pornographic Material Effects of pornography are broad and the consequences are hazardous as it affects the moral fiber of the society. Censorship of explicit and pornographic material should be encouraged as we cannot imagine the catastrophe that […]
• China Intellectual Property Research on Censorship To prove the importance of the China’s intention to set the internet censorship, it is necessary to mention about rapid expansion of online technologies has made the internet one of the effective means of communication […]
• Pornography and Censorship in Society Admittedly, sexual explicitness has risen to new levels in the last few years, due in part to changing attitudes toward sexual behavior and the desire for more personal flexibility in the making of moral decisions.”The […]
• Censorship, Holocaust and Political Correctness In this paper, we will focus on exploring different aspects of formal and informal censorship, in regards to a so-called “Holocaust denial”, as we strongly believe that people’s ability to express their thoughts freely is […]
• Censorship in the United States Thus, the rationale of censorship is that it is necessary for the protection of the three basic social institutions; the family; the religion; the state.
• Balance of Media Censorship and Press Freedom Government censorship means the prevention of the circulation of information already produced by the official government There are justifications for the suppression of communication such as fear that it will harm individuals in the society […]
• Music Censorship in the United States Censorship is an act of the government and the government had no hand in the ban of Dixie Chicks songs, rather it was the fans boycotts that led to a ban on airplay.
• Modern Means of Censorship In his article Internet Censorship neither by Government nor by Media, Jossey writes about the importance of online political communication during the elections and the new level of freedom provided by the Internet.
• Art and Media Censorship: Plato, Aristotle, and David Hume The philosopher defines God and the creator’s responsibilities in the text of the Republic: The creator is real and the opposite of evil.
• Censorship, Its Forms and Purpose The argument here is that censorship is a means being used by conservative persons and groups with distinct interests to make life standards so difficult and unbearable for the minors in the society, in the […]
• Censorship in China: History and Controlling This is especially so when the government or a dominant religious denomination in a country is of the view that the proliferation of a certain religious dogma threatens the stability of the country or the […]
• Creativity and Censorship in Egyptian Filmmaking The intention of the media laws and other statutes censoring the film industry is to protect the sanctity of religion, sex, and the overly conservative culture of the Egyptian people.
• Internet Censorship and Cultural Values in the UAE Over the past few years, the government of the UAE introduced several measures, the main aim of which is to protect the mentality of people of the state and its culture from the pernicious influence […]
• Censorship Impacts on Civil Liberties In the US, the First Amendment guarantees the freedom of expression; it is one of the main democratic rights and freedoms.
• Internet Censorship: Blocking and Filtering It is the obligation of the government to protect the innocence of the children through internet censorship. In some nations, the government uses internet blocking and filtering as a method to hide information from the […]
• Media Censorship: Wikileaks Wikileaks just offers the information which is to be available for people. Information is not just a source of knowledge it is the way to control the world.
• Censorship on the Internet Censorship in the internet can also occur in the traditional sense of the word where material is removed from the internet to prevent public access.
• Censorship of Social Networking Sites in Developing Countries Censorship of social media sites is the control of information that is available to users. The aim of this paper was to discuss censorship of social media sites in third world countries.
• Government Censorship of WikiLeaks In my opinion, the government should censor WikiLeaks in order to control information content that it releases to the public. In attempting to censor WikiLeaks, the US and Australian government will be limiting the freedom […]
• Censorship defeats its own purpose Is that not a disguised method of promoting an authoritarian regime by allowing an individual or a group of individuals to make that decision for the entire society The proponents of SOPA bill may argue […]
• Censorship and Banned Books Based on what has been presented in this paper so far it can be seen that literary freedom is an important facilitator in helping children develop a certain degree of intellectual maturity by broadening their […]
• Ethics and Media: Censorship in the UAE In this case, it is possible to apply the harm principle, according to which the task of the state is to minimize potential threats to the entire community.
• Aspects of Internet Censorship by the Government When one try to access a website the uniform resource locator is checked if it consists of the restricting keyword, if the keyword is found in the URL the site become unavailable.
• Censorship vs. Self-censorship in the News Media Assessment of the appropriateness of the mass media in discharging the above-named duties forms the basis of the ideological analysis of the news media.
• Should Censorship Laws Be Applied to the Internet? On the other hand, the need to control cyber crime, cyber stalking, and violation of copyrights, examination leakage and other negative uses of the internet has become a necessity.
• Internet Censorship in Saudi Arabia The censorship is charged to the ISU, which, manage the high-speed data links connecting the country to the rest of the world.
• Media Control and Censorship of TV The second type of control imposed on the media is the control of information that may put the security of a country at risk.
• Chinese Censorship Block Chinese People from Creativity With the development of the country’s first browser in the year 1994 and subsequent move by the government to “provide internet accessing services” in the year 1996, the use of the technology began to develop […]
• Censorship for Television and Radio Media This paper seeks to provide an in-depth analysis of censorship with the aim of determining the extent to which content on broadcast media can be censored. A good example of a situation in which moral […]
• Empirical Likelihood Semiparametric Regression Analysis Under Random Censorship
• An Argument Against Internet Censorship in United States of America
• The Lack of Freedom and the Radio Censorship in the United States of America
• Censorship as the Control of What People May Say or Hear, Write or Read, or See or Do
• An Analysis and Overview of the Censorship and Explicit Lyrics in the United States of America
• The First Amendment and Censorship in the United States
• Advertiser Influence on The Media: Censorship and the Media
• The Freedom of Speech and Censorship on the Internet
• Censorship Necessary for Proper Education of Guardian
• An Argument in Favor of Censorship on Television Based on Content, the Time Slot and the Audience
• Music Censorship and the Effects of Listening to Music with Violent and Objectionable Lyrics
• An Analysis of Controversial Issue in Censorship on the Internet
• Consistent Estimation Under Random Censorship When Covariables Are Present
• Music Censorship Is a Violation of Constitutional and Human
• Censorship Should Not Be Imposed by the Government
• Internet Censorship and Its Role in Protecting Our Societys Addolecent Community
• Against Internet Censorship Even Pornography
• The Concept of Censorship on College Campuses on the Topic of Racism and Sexism
• Cyber-Frontier and Internet Censorship from the Government
• Creative Alternatives in the Issues of Censorship in the United States
• Asymptotically Efficient Estimation Under Semi-Parametric Random Censorship Models
• Chinese and Russian Regimes and Tactics of Censorship
• An Overview of the Right or Wrong and the Principles of Censorship
• An Argument Against the Censorship of Literature in Schools Due to Racism in the Literary Works
• The History, Positive and Negative Effects of Censorship in the United States
• Burlesque Shows and Censorship Analysis
• Importance of Free Speech on the Internet and Its Censorship
• Historical Background of the Libertarian Party and Their Views on the Role of the Government, Censorship, and Gun Control
• Internet Censorship and the Communications Decency Act
• Monitoring Children’s Surfing Habits Is a Better Way Than Putting Censorship Over the Internet
• A History of Censorship in Ancient and Modern Civilizations
• Censorship, Supervision and Control of the Information and Ideas
• Importance of Television Censorship to the Three Basic Social Institutions
• An Argument That Censorship Must Be Employed if Morals and Decency Are to Be Preserved
• Is Internet Censorship and De-Anonymization an Attack on Our Freedom
• Censorship or Parental Monitoring
• What Does Raleigh’s Letter Home and the Censorship Issue Tell You About Raleigh?
• Does Censorship Limit One’s Freedom?
• How Darwin Shaped Our Understanding of Why Language Exists?
• How Does Censorship Affect the Relationship with His Wife?
• Why and How Censorship Lead to Ignorance in Young People?
• What Is the Impact of Censorship on Children?
• How Does Media Censorship Violate Freedom of Expression and Impact Businesses?
• Censorship or Responsibility: Which Is the Lesser of Two?
• How Can Censorship Hinder Progress?
• How Musical Censorship Related to the Individual?
• How The Media Pretends to Protect Us with Censorship?
• What Is the Impact of Censorship on Our Everyday Lives?
• Is There China Internet Censorship Against Human Rights?
• Can Ratings for Movies Censorship Be Socially Justified?
• Censorship: Should Public Libraries Filter Internet Sites?
• Does Parental Censorship Make Children More Curious?
• What Are the Arguments for and Against the Censorship of Pornography?
• How Propaganda and Censorship Were Used In Britain and Germany During WWI?
• Should the Chinese Government Ban the Internet Censorship?
• How Virginia Woolf’s Orlando Subverted Censorship and Revolutionized the Politics of LGBT Love in 1928?
• How Modern Dictators Survive: Cooptation, Censorship, Propaganda, and Repression?
• What arguments Were Used to Support or Oppose Censorship in Video Nasties?
• Why News Ownership Affects Free Press and Press Censorship?
• Should Music Suffer the Bonds of Censorship Interviews?
• Why Should Graffiti Be Considered an Accepted from of Art?
• What Is the Connection Between Censorship and the Banning of Books?
• How Does Congress Define Censor and Censorship?
• How Does Censorship Affect the Development of Animations?
• Why Should Internet Censorship Be Allowed?
• Fake News Research Ideas
• Government Regulation Titles
• Internet Research Ideas
• Music Topics
• Public Relations Titles
• Video Game Topics
• Media Analysis Topics
• Child Development Research Ideas
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, October 26). 113 Censorship Essay Topics & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/censorship-essay-examples/

"113 Censorship Essay Topics & Examples." IvyPanda , 26 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/censorship-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2023) '113 Censorship Essay Topics & Examples'. 26 October.

IvyPanda . 2023. "113 Censorship Essay Topics & Examples." October 26, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/censorship-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "113 Censorship Essay Topics & Examples." October 26, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/censorship-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "113 Censorship Essay Topics & Examples." October 26, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/censorship-essay-examples/.

Ohio State nav bar

The Ohio State University

• BuckeyeLink
• Find People
• Search Ohio State

Theater and Politics in Socialist China: A Review Essay

MCLC Resource Center is pleased to announce publication of Letizia Fusini’s review essay, “Theater and Politics in Socialist China,” which treats recently published books on modern Chinese drama by Maggie Greene, Siyuan Liu, and Xiaomei Chen. The review appears below and at its online home: https://u.osu.edu/mclc/book-reviews/fusini/ . My thanks to Jason McGrath, our soon-to-be-former book review editor for media, film, and drama studies, for ushering the review to publication.

Kirk Denton, MCLC

Resisting Spirits , by Maggie Greene Transforming Tradition,  by Siyuan Liu Performing the Socialist State , by Xiaomei Chen

Reviewed by Letizia Fusini MCLC Resource Center Publication (Copyright May, 2024)

Maggie Greene, Resisting Spirits: Drama Reform and Cultural Transformation in the PRC Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2019. 260pp ISBN: 9780472074303 (hardcover)

Siyuan Liu, Transforming Tradition: The Reform of Chinese Theater in the 1950s and Early 1960s Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2021. 472pp. ISBN: 9780472132478 (hardcover); 9780472128723 (ebook)

Xiaomei Chen, Performing the Socialist State: Modern Chinese Theater and Film Culture New York: Columbia University Press, 2023. 384pp. ISBN: 9780231197762 (hardcover); 9780231552332 (ebook)

Nearly a decade ago, in Autumn 2016, I had the opportunity and the privilege to teach an undergraduate survey course on the history of Chinese theater, the only one of its kind in the UK back then. I was a freshly minted PhD graduate and that was my first teaching post. Aside from developing my lecturing skills, the main challenge was to find creative strategies to make the subject more accessible to students who were majoring in theater studies and knew almost nothing about Chinese culture and history. The task became even more daunting when, due to time constraints, I had to condense the history of the rise of modern drama ( huaju  话剧) and the transformations of classical theater ( xiqu  戏曲) throughout the late-Qing, Republican and early socialist epochs within the space of a couple of hours. Since I wanted to avoid information overload, I began to look for a unifying thread that could hthelp me connect these three periods and, in my research, I came across an excerpt from a text written by Chen Duxiu 陈独秀 in 1904, where the future founder of the CCP eulogizes theater as the best “vehicle for social reform” (120), tracing the paternity of this idea to Confucius, who once said that “nothing is better than  yue  [乐, the performing arts  lato sensu ] at transforming social conventions” (118). These thoughts, written just before the dawn of the Republican period and yet rooted in the Confucian tradition, prefigured the  Zeitgeist  of the New Culture and May Fourth Movements, which, in turn, would be lauded by Mao Zedong in his essay “On New Democracy” as “having pioneered an unprecedentedly great and thoroughgoing cultural revolution” (361) whose only fault was that it failed to serve the interests of the masses of workers, peasants, and soldiers. Through these connections, I was able to visualize the (r)evolution of Chinese theater in the first half of the twentieth century as a tree growing out of Confucian roots and projecting its branches and foliage in a Marxist direction culminating with the Cultural Revolution of 1966-1976. My goal was to convey to my students the impression I had gotten vis-à-vis that short statement by Chen Duxiu about the power of theater to effect social change. The fact that in China, the attribution of a pedagogic and political function to theater is a traditional concept rather than a twentieth-century novelty, hence not an exclusive prerogative of the Communist period or of the Cultural Revolution, was the unifying thread I was looking for. What was initially a mere perception on my part, found confirmation in Richard Schechner’s foreword to the collection in which I originally found Chen Duxiu’s text, where he notes that “the roots of Mao’s attitude—that theater is an excellent educator and that rulers ought to use it as such—go deep in Chinese history. From an early date, theater was seen as a way of reaching ordinary people who could not read” (x).

Schechner’s remark can open up an intellectual space for conceiving and understanding the transformations of Chinese theater(s) in the modern era as a holistic phenomenon that bridges different epochs. Quite recently, arguments that endorse and further develop this kind of perspective have been advanced, in a more extensive manner, by eminent scholars of Chinese drama and performance in three book-length studies published between 2019 and 2023. These are, by order of publication, Maggie Greene’s  Resisting Spirits: Drama Reform and Cultural Transformation in the PRC  (2019), Siyuan Liu’s  Transforming Tradition: The Reform of Chinese Theater in the 1950s and Early 1960s  (2021), and Xiaomei Chen’s  Performing the Socialist State: Modern Chinese Theater and Film Culture  (2023).

Although they focus largely on the theater of the high socialist period (1949-1966), these studies ultimately regard the latter as coterminous with the drama reform of the Republican age, as foreshadowing the model operas of the Cultural Revolution period, and as extending its legacy into the post-Mao era (which they also touch on).

Before undertaking a comparative commentary of these books, I provide a brief summary and a preliminary evaluation of each, with a particular discussion of the extent to which their findings appear to converge, as well as highlighting the specificities of their critical approaches.

Greene’s monograph  Resisting Spirits  reconstructs the vicissitudes of ghost opera (鬼戏) during the high socialist period (1949-1966), and, more succinctly, in the early post-Mao era when literary ghosts started to reappear on Chinese stages following an almost two-decade ban (issued in 1963). More specifically, Greene examines the reception of three different adaptations of a Ming-dynasty canonical play titled  Story of Red Plums  whose original plot involves, among other things, the execution of a young concubine (Li Huiniang 李蕙娘) who returns to the earth  post-mortem  in ghostly form to avenge herself on the ruthless prime minister who had condemned her to death. Two of the dramatic texts under scrutiny in this study are Ma Jianling’s 马建翎 1953  Wandering West Lake  (游西湖) and its 1958 revised version, while the third is Meng Chao’s 孟超  Li Huiniang  李蕙娘, which premiered in 1961 and, together with Wu Han’s 吴晗 Hai  Rui Dismissed from Office  (海瑞罢官) and Tian Han’s 田汉  Xie Yaohuan  谢瑶环, contributed to the outbreak of the Cultural Revolution. Moreover, the book’s final chapter is devoted to probing the afterlives of  Li Huiniang  at the dawn of the postsocialist age, particularly through analysis of an award-winning 1981 production starring Hu Zhifeng 胡芝风 and the related critical reviews. As Greene explains in the introduction, although ghosts and ghost plays are the titular subject matter of the book, they play an auxiliary role in her analysis, which is primarily aimed at opening up new views on how cultural workers reinterpreted and reused valuable material from China’s classical literary canon to suit the needs of a society that was transitioning into a new era as well as the demands of a ruling party that looked suspiciously at what it considered to be the relics of a feudal past. As a matter of fact, Greene selected ghost opera because it “had occupied an important role in the cultural and political discussions between 1949 and 1963” (12), thereby providing “a fascinating lens through which to view the high socialist period” (13). In other words, ghost opera and the intellectual discourse generated by its reuses as a form of new historical drama in the early years of the PRC is employed as a  method  to shed light on a particular area of drama reform which, however limited in scope, can provide further insights into broader cultural discussions concerning the distinction between superstition and mythology, and the relevance of ghostly characters to the promotion of class struggle among the laboring masses.

The volume makes an important contribution to questions of historical periodization as regards the PRC’s transition from a revolutionary to a post-revolutionary society. It effectively challenges the pre- and post-Great Leap Forward divide and debunks the myth of the Cultural Revolution as an isolated period in the history of the PRC. It also contributes, to a degree, to “depoliticizing” the received narrative of drama reform and cultural transformation in the high socialist period by telling what Greene defines as “the other side of the story”—that is, by laying bare the creative and aesthetic efforts of writers and critics in forging a new socialist literature that was meant to be not only ideologically correct, but also artistically satisfactory. She convincingly shows that cultural elites had a genuine interest in protecting the national literary heritage from being severely pruned, if not totally eradicated, which was not at all an easy task given that it entailed a constant negotiation among ever-shifting party policies, colleagues’ criticisms, collective concerns, and individual aspirations. Moreover, on account of the selected case studies, Greene’s book effectively foregrounds ghost opera as having played a major role not only in determining the direction of drama reform in the mid–twentieth century, but also, albeit indirectly, in contributing to the radicalization of the political atmosphere in the run-up to the Cultural Revolution.

Siyuan Liu’s volume  Transforming Tradition  is a monumental study tracing the origin and development of the CCP-led  xiqu  reform campaign during the high socialist period. As Liu’s thorough and impeccably researched analysis shows, this largely top-down reform process resulted, within a relatively short time span of seventeen years, in a radical alteration of the nature of classical Chinese theater’s dramaturgies and performance methods as well as in mutilating what he terms “ xiqu ’s entire ecosystem” (329). The book provides a comprehensive documentary history of this phenomenon, which Liu interprets through a multifarious theoretical framework combining concepts of historicism, gentrification, and colonial modernity with “additional influences from Marxist materialism and the Soviet Union” (18). Consisting of six ultra-dense thematic chapters, which examine the main initiatives aimed at purifying  xiqu  from its allegedly feudal, primitive, bourgeois, and even colonial elements and in a spirit (and language) that consistently echoed May Fourth intellectuals’ semi-iconoclastic critiques, the book identifies a thread of continuity between two ideologically divergent periods of China’s twentieth century, the Republican and the Communist eras. As a matter of fact, attempts at making  xiqu , and particularly  jingju  (京剧), more “modern” and “realistic” in its content and stage design yet without sacrificing its distinctive and time-honored art had been tentatively implemented through the collaborative efforts of Mei Lanfang 梅兰芳 and Qi Rushan 齐如山 over two decades between the late 1910s and the early 1930s. Through meticulously reconstructing the dynamics of what was presented in 1951 as a project based on a “three-pronged approach” (改人, 改戏, 改制, i.e. reforming practitioners, repertoire, and organizational structure), Liu cogently shows that the CCP-affiliated reform leaders took over from where Mei and Qi had given up. Their strategy was partially informed by cultural and diplomatic aspirations reminiscent of those underlying the May Fourth intellectuals’ advocacy for a theatrical (r)evolution, which would later result in the emergence of spoken drama, and of those of the Mei-Qi duo who, in an attempt to refashion  jingju  as China’s national theatrical tradition par excellence, sought to accentuate its quintessential characteristics, especially its visual appeal, to help refashion China’s image in the West. Nevertheless, unlike Mei Lanfang who, as a fully trained  jingju  actor had become increasingly aware of the risks associated with modifying the fundamental principles of  xiqu , their lack of technical and artistical expertise prevented them from predicting the negative effects of a reform that was  de facto  not only ideologically biased but also totally disconnected from the practical realities of  xiqu .

Liu’s study, which relies on a rich array of textual and visual archival sources never previously referenced in anglophone research, illuminates a complex example of a politically driven, all-encompassing theater reform and its problematic legacy that affects present-day practice. It achieves this goal by documenting in-depth the theoretical basis and practical aspects of the reform process, giving equal attention to content and form as the true pillars of  xiqu ’s edifice, and devoting adequate space to exploring ways in which regional genres ( difangxi  地方戏) were also targeted. Aside from making a substantial contribution to advancing the field of Chinese and theater studies, the volume also offers valuable insights into the landscape of global intercultural theater studies. Specifically, Liu develops Min Tian’s (2008) view of Chinese theater’s interculturation of Western theater in the twentieth century as a case of cultural displacement that entails both constructive and destructive effects on the tradition. “Displacement,” according to Tian, is the result of a process whereby “the Other is inevitably understood, interpreted, and placed in accordance with the aesthetic and artistic imperatives of the Self pertaining to its own tradition and its placement in the present, irrespective of the extent of the Self’s true knowledge of its Other” (Tian 2008: 6). In the case of Communist-era  xiqu  reform, as Liu insightfully shows, not only was the Other (i.e., Western realism, Marxian historical materialism, and the Stanislavsky’s system of psychological realism) displaced in an attempt to “gentrify” the indigenous tradition, but it was that very same tradition that was originally displaced, or misinterpreted. Quite fittingly, in defining the mid-century  xiqu  reform as a case of “gentrification,” Liu points out that, while the various targeted components of  xiqu  can be equaled to “displaced residents” of a “deteriorating area that needed salvation,” “it may be more accurate in many cases to describe the components as being  decentered  rather than displaced” (2). Liu’s meticulous analysis of how CCP reform policies weakened the centrality of the actor in the creative process of  xiqu  and in determining audience appeal, provides confirming evidence of and further elaborates on Min Tian’s earlier observations on the detrimental consequences of imposing a “naturalistic modernization” (173) on  xiqu  acting style through an ideological use of the Stanislavski system.

Moving on from  xiqu  to its “modern” counterpart, Xiaomei Chen’s monograph  Performing the Socialist State  is a two-part critical history of  huaju  from its beginnings in the late-Qing and Republican period to the twenty-first century. As its title suggests, the bulk of the book is devoted to the theater and film culture of the high socialist period and its impact on the post-Mao age. The Cultural Revolution period is not included in the discussion because the author has already dealt with it in a previous publication (Chen 2002) and because of the abundance of excellent scholarly studies on the topic. However, before delving into the  minutiae  of “Chinese Socialist Theater and its afterlife” through an intriguing selection of so far less-studied genres, plays, and topics, the author devotes the first three chapters that constitute Part I to reconstructing the lives and careers of the three individuals who are officially considered to be the founding fathers of Chinese spoken drama: Tian Han (1898-1969), Hong Shen 洪深 (1984-1955), and Ouyang Yuqian 欧阳予倩 (1889-1962). Grouping these playwrights together as “a unique trio” (8) allows Chen to highlight the various ways in which they contributed to bringing theater closer to the people well before the Communist takeover, and how they continued to put their creativity and their individual initiative in the service of the socialist cause and for the betterment of Chinese society. By starting off with an examination of the three founding fathers’ respective achievements as eclectic representatives of the hybridized literary, theatrical, and cinematic culture of the early Republican age, Chen lays the foundation for the ensuing discussion in Part II, where she essentially argues that Chinese socialist theater was born from the leftist cultural tradition the three “partially” created (8). Furthermore, their works and those of other leading Republican-era playwrights are mentioned at various places in part II as well, in connection with analogous plays of the socialist and postsocialist periods, to show the extent to which the latter can be said to have perpetuated and further developed a set of pre-existing genres, styles, and thematic concerns born out of the experimental practices of the early decades of the twentieth century. Hence, although the book is primarily focused on emphasizing the legacies of three key figures of the  huaju  tradition, whose personal stories are used as “threads for discussion between various periods, histories, and ideologies,” the book is not as “limited” (12) as the author laments, for at least for two reasons. First, Chen manages to include an impressive range of other important twentieth-century playwrights and plays that constitute the history of  huaju , hence interspersing the discussion with a wealth of comparative links. Second, she has further enriched it with an interdisciplinary perspective, first by opening each of the eight chapters with a classic red song—ranging from “The March of the Volunteers” to “The Internationale”—and then by discussing the interweaving relationship between mediascapes and soundscapes in the transition from a pre-revolutionary to a post-revolutionary China. The book’s final chapter, which examines the reception of “The Internationale” and its constant repurposing over the course of 100 years, not only shows the extent to which a single text can be adapted to express opposing ideologies or to critique the dominant discourse, but also provides further confirmation of the formidable power of the Confucian concept of  yue  in forging a collective spirit of adherence to the status quo and, at the same time, promoting new cultural impulses that seek to challenge that very status quo.

Chen’s volume has an impressive breadth and depth that the title and cover image do not adequately anticipate. Although a substantial part of the book is indeed about theater and film culture of the socialist age, the title and cover, which may be important from a marketing perspective, fail to capture what is arguably the heart of its narrative—namely, the consistent references to how Tian Han’s, Hong Shen’s, and Ouyang Yuqian’s artistic endeavours in the Republican era paved the way for the creation of a socialist performance culture that has not vanished despite the PRC’s transition to a capitalist economy and the advent of a consumerist society. This is all the more true given that, as the author asserts, one of the main goals of the book is to deconstruct the ways in which the image of the three pioneers of  huaju  has been distorted in post-Mao Chinese-language scholarship, where they are seen alternatively as perpetrators or as victims of the socialist regime. Among the many insights that can be gleaned from this study, the most noteworthy one in my opinion is the revelation that there exists a profound link between, on the one hand, the aesthetic liberalism and critical realism of the Republican age and, on the other, the commitment to ideological purity and political correctness of the high socialist period, an indissoluble binary that continues to inform contemporary Chinese theaters into the new millennium. As the chapter on Meng Bing’s 孟冰 soldier plays and history plays shows,  huaju , in its contemporary incarnation, has not relinquished its original mission of creatively enacting a social criticism while still appealing to a mass audience. As in Meng’s specific case, the legacy of his three illustrious predecessors has been carried forward by expanding the socialist realist tradition as a means of exposing, in an ingenuously subversive yet aptly surreptitious way, the CCP’s inability to fulfil the promises of freedom, equality, and democracy that motivated, amongst other things, the rise of modern drama over a century earlier.

A major common denominator of these books is that they view the developmental trajectory of Chinese theater (both classical and modern) during the high socialist and, to a degree, postsocialist periods as largely a continuation of the reform projects advocated by intellectuals of the early Republican period that were predicated on a tradition/modernity divide. Throughout the twentieth century, whether it was about reforming  xiqu  or inventing and perfecting a new genre such as  huaju , intellectuals, playwrights, and cultural workers had to navigate a complex and unstable social, cultural, and political environment that required them to balance the competing demands of artistic innovation and political correctness, with uneven results.

These studies employ different methodologies that help rethink the commonly accepted standards of periodization of China’s twentieth-century drama and performance culture.

Greene’s text-based analysis of how ghost plays were revised and discussed between the 1950s and the early 1960s is informed by the methodology of “surface reading,” which “accounts for what is in the texts without construing presence as absence or affirmation as negation” (Best/Marcus 2009: 12). As opposed to “symptomatic reading,” which actively looks for a meaning that is not explicitly stated by the text or the author, surface reading does not wrest meaning out of a text and does not assume priority of subtext over text. By looking at the surface of the discourse on ghost opera and by interpreting ghostly characters as literary fantasies rather than as carriers of implicit political messages, Greene convincingly questions the claim that ghost play adaptations written in the early 1960s—like Meng Chao’s  Li Huiniang —were meant primarily as vehicles for veiled criticism in regard to the catastrophic consequences of the Great Leap Forward. Although she does not deny that these plays may have also been created to express their authors’ political views, she is right in cautioning against the reductionism that may develop from such an interpretation, because it fails to acknowledge not only their literary quality, but also the fact that a large part of the debate was focused on tackling cultural and ideological issues that were unrelated to the economic policies of the time. Hence, this method allows Greene to situate the debate on ghost drama within a “longer literary time that connects the Mao era with a deeper cultural past” (16) and to disentangle it from the various political campaigns of the high socialist period.

Liu, too, views the reform of traditional theater in the Communist era as part of a much broader phenomenon that predates the Communist takeover and whose roots go back to the Self-strengthening Movement of the late-Qing period, which led to the systematic study of Western culture, opening the doors to a wealth of fresh ideas, styles, and critical approaches, including a new vision of history as a linear and teleological process. Nevertheless, his interpretation of the mid-century  xiqu  reform campaign as “a case of historicism” and “as part of the global modernity project” (18) is potentially problematic, not only because “historicism” is a highly elusive concept, but because the definition he relies on, which is drawn from Dipesh Chakrabarty’s  Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference  (2000), connects historicism with European Enlightenment, a connection that is contradictory. The fact that  xiqu  was considered old and stagnant during the May Fourth era, and vulgar, formalist, and ideologically immature in the high socialist era, and therefore needed to “evolve” or, as Liu contends, to be “gentrified,” by following the example set by Western theater and by incorporating Western elements, can be better explained as a case of cultural Darwinism (paired up with historical materialism). Unlike the Enlightenment, which aspired to find “some eternal and universal Archimedean standpoint by which they could judge all specific societies, states and cultures” (Beiser 2011: 11), historicism argues against the existence of such universal values and aims to trace “the historical development of specific cultures rather than . . . the construction of a grand evolutionary account of the progress march of Culture” (Smith, “Historicism”). In my view, it would be more appropriate to replace (or integrate) the historicist frame with one based on cultural Darwinism, along the lines of the “adaptive comparative method” proposed by Sowon S. Park to study the Westernization of East Asian literatures in the modern era. Such a frame, which proposes to interpret Westernization as a means of gaining a competitive edge over the West rather than as a form of submission to colonial imperatives, would allow for a better understanding of the reasons why Republican-era and Communist-era discourses on the necessity of  xiqu  reform can be said to represent two faces of the same reality or, better still, two different stages of the same program of artistic development and cultural acquisition. When Hu Shi 胡適 stated that China lacked a sense of literary evolution and that Chinese theater could be reformed only by engaging with the most advanced forms of foreign drama, which would have to be examined through a comparative perspective and with the aim of injecting “some youthful blood from Western literature” (Hu Shi 1996: 116), he was not endorsing a colonial vision of literary evolution but was proposing that Chinese culture voluntarily adapt to Western standards in order to survive and thrive. As such, he was laying the foundation of Mao’s later advocacy for a new democratic culture that “opposes imperialist oppression and upholds the dignity and independence of the Chinese nation” (367), a formulation which, as Liu notes, set the tone of the debate guiding the 1950s  xiqu  reform campaign.

Although she does not explicitly acknowledge a specific theoretical and methodological framework for her analysis of the development of modern Chinese drama, Chen explains why she decided to adopt “a holistic view that bridges the Republican and PRC periods” (7) and a thematic approach in lieu of a strictly chronological one. Essentially, her goal is to offer a multifaceted and interdisciplinary critical history that is accessible to a nonspecialist readership and includes a range of authors, works, and practices. As she notes in the introduction, one of her main motivations for attempting what she calls “an almost impossible task” (7) is the realization, through her teaching and research, of the continuous relevance of early  huaju  works to contemporary times as attested by the many productions and rewritings of  The   Black Slave Cries Out to Heaven  (黑奴吁天录), a rendering of  Uncle Tom’s Cabin  that is one of the foundational pieces of Chinese spoken drama, through the socialist and postsocialist periods. It seems to me that the choice of case studies for part II is also instrumental in strengthening the effectiveness of Chen’s holistic perspective. In chapter 4, for example, she examines the rise of one-act satirical comedies (独木讽刺戏剧) of the mid-1950s as an example of “socialist critical realism” and views them as carrying forward the legacy of Yang Jiang’s 杨绛 and Chen Baichen’s 陈白尘 comedies of the Republican period, which exposed the hypocrisies and corruption of Chinese society under the Nationalist regime. Similarly, in chapter 5, which focuses on the representation of women characters in a series of red classic films and performances, she shows how these works are steeped in the tradition of early-twentieth century feminist theater inspired by Ibsen’s Nora and nurtured by burgeoning leftist ideologies, and how they were resurrected and refashioned in the postsocialist period in an effort to combine aestheticization with a renewed revolutionary spirit. The remaining chapters are organized, again, around a particular genre or theme that is examined across the socialist and postsocialist periods and are interspersed with references to the pre-1949 era history and performance culture.

Another aspect that emerges from a comparison of these three studies is that, despite the gradual tightening of the political and ideological climate over the course of the high socialist period, the debates on drama reform and the creation of new dramas went on undeterred, albeit in a cyclical, nonlinear manner, until the start of the Cultural Revolution, suggesting that artists and critics managed to find a space to exercise their freedom of expression despite party-imposed restrictions. They were perhaps aided by the fact that until the early 1960s there was considerable ambiguity as to the direction in which the CCP intended to steer cultural production and as to how to interpret Mao’s early recommendation “not to reject the legacy of the ancients” and later encouragement to criticize the wrongdoings of CCP officials. As Chen points out, the early 1950s saw the creation of several plays that cannot be categorized as fully “red” but that embody “all colors, red, gray, black, and every other spectrum in between” (153). On a similar note, Greene’s analysis shows that the debate on ghosts was multifarious and dynamic. It encompassed competing views, and, over the years, the focus shifted from discussing the suitability of supernatural literature and drama to determining how ghostly characters should be presented to audiences, whether as role models of class struggle or as symbols of feudal and bourgeois enemies. The CCP-led reform of  xiqu , too, was implemented amid several rounds of debates and generated criticisms and negative reactions from artists, intellectuals, and audiences, though they did not manage to mitigate the disastrous effects of the top-down decisions taken by reform leaders and (often irresponsibly) enforced by local cadres. As a matter of fact, while the process had a fluctuating course as it shifted between radical and liberal phases (the latter occurred in 1957 and between 1960 and 1962), in general, it followed a unilateral trajectory that resulted in an excessive accentuation of the didactic and ideological function of theater and in a reduction of its most spectacular and ludic aspects.

Another aspect that links Greene’s and Liu’s studies concerns their shared findings on the paradoxical and ironic consequences of censorship and self-censorship processes aimed at bestowing a layer of ideological correctness on a canonical play’s content. Greene’s choice of case studies blatantly shows that an overzealous approach consisting in excessive plot excisions and modifications for the mere sake of achieving ideological purity could result in grossly distorting the nature of the text to a point verging on the absurd. As can be seen from Ma Jianling’s early attempt at producing a socialist-flavoured version of a pre-modern ghost play, his radical decision to eliminate the ghost to avoid fostering superstitious beliefs triggered a wave of severe criticism from various intellectuals who pointed out that in the original play the ghost was shown to stand up against injustice and feudal oppression and it was therefore imperative to keep it. Ironically, the old text, albeit anchored in pre-socialist culture, was deemed more ideologically sound than its modern-day version, which looked unreasonably mutilated. An analogous case is represented by the so-called  badana  (八大拿) plays, which formed part of the foundational repertoire of  jingju wusheng  (京剧武生) actors and were banned, like ghost drama, after 1963, after having been heavily abridged to expunge parts of the content that were considered reactionary and pernicious. The censoring of these plays’ contents, which entailed altering the plot and removing key scenes, resulted in an excessive simplification of the actors’ training practices, which, in turn, affected the artistic quality and believability of their performances. This is because  xiqu  is a totalizing kind of theater where content determines form and vice versa. As a matter of fact, the  badana  plays, which Liu intriguingly associates with Greek tragedy for their emphasis on portraying conflicts and dilemmas, attach great importance to the actors’ facial expressions and physical actions not as mere manifestations of skill but as a sophisticated means of conveying the characters’ nuanced psychologies. Similarly, as Liu rightfully notes, the ideological attack on  xiqu ’s distinctive theatricality, which was erroneously equated with “formalism,” involved the further curtailing of fundamental scenes, the flattening of key characters’ personalities, and even the elimination of a range of centuries-old conventional performance techniques and gestures, which were replaced with a realist and lifelike performance style based on Stanislavsky’s brand of psychological realism. These measures proved detrimental to the integrity and authenticity of  xiqu  because they ultimately resulted in disconnecting form from content and, by depriving the actors of their ability to strike a balance between prescribed manners and personal inventiveness, made the art of  xiqu  degenerate into something artificial and incapable of achieving genuine characterization. The fact that the adoption of Stanislavsky’s realism failed to enhance  xiqu  actors’ impersonation skills and instead caused them to feel impeded and unnatural confirms Huang Zuolin’s insightful remark that the attempt to create a fourth wall, “an illusion of real life on stage . . . imposes limitations, restricting us by the framework of the stage and thereby seriously hampering creativity” (Huang 1999: 156). Min Tian, too, points out that although, and contrary to what Brecht assumed,  xiqu  actors do identify with the role, their way of combining “the ‘inner technique’ of introspection with the outgoing technique of representation,” as Huang Zuolin (1999: 157) put it, is not consistent with the principles of Stanislavsky’s realism because the latter does not aim for “beauty and refinement” (171). As Li Yu 李渔, an illustrious writer and drama theorist of the early Qing period stated in his monumental work  Casual Notes on a Leisurely Mood  (闲情偶寄, 1671), “there is a difference between manners in real life and those on the stage” (Li Yu 1999: 87).

On the whole, by foregrounding the continuities in the development of Chinese theater across distinct periods of modernity (Republican, socialist, and postsocialist) and by considering the impact of Communist-era theater reforms on contemporary performance culture (even if succinctly), these three studies variously testify to the complexities and contradictions of the relationship between art and politics and between tradition and innovation. Moreover, they give evidence of the extent to which censorship practices can or cannot sanction a definitive break with the past. Considering the first two aspects, Chen’s final chapters, especially the one on Meng Bing and the one on sonic theater, demonstrate that contemporary Chinese artists continue to be driven by the same ideals that motivated the founding fathers of  huaju , while also seeking new avenues and strategies to express their vision and produce works that satisfy the authorities as well as audiences. As for ghost plays, as Greene illustrates in her final chapter, they never disappeared from the Chinese stages despite several attempts at casting them in a bad light that culminated in the 1963 ban. As the title of her book suggests, not only have these supernatural figures consistently embodied a spirit of resistance to evil and oppression, they are also part of an undying legacy that, although crippled during the high socialist period, has managed to regain its original status in the postsocialist era and is now associated more with the world of phantasy and entertainment than with the pedagogical function imposed on it between 1949 and 1962. The same, however, cannot be said for  xiqu  more generally. In the concluding chapter of his book, Liu offers a detailed analysis of a 1959  jingju  production of  The Battle of Red Cliff  (赤壁之战) and of the ensuing debate as a means of assessing the results of the reform campaigns, given that in that year the CCP had announced the completed nationalization of private  xiqu  companies. The fact that this production was generally found disappointing due to the adoption of a historical materialist perspective that encumbered the pace of the story, weakened characterization, and destroyed entertainment, testifies to the failure of this reform process, which, as Liu repeatedly points out, was guided by ignorance of the true essence of  xiqu  and a wilful bias against its supposed primitiveness. Liu’s concluding remarks extend to  xiqu ’s contemporary ecosystem, which he dismally but realistically defines as “the legacy of a seventeen-year tradition” (331) that managed to radically (and perhaps definitively) steer the course of an ancient art form. Finally, and contrary to received wisdom, these three books forcefully show the highly experimental and prolific nature of the theater activities of the high socialist period, which gave rise to equally prolific critical debates. Taken together, they paint a dynamic history made of lights and shadows, in which the past and the present mirror each other in (often) surprising ways.

Letizia Fusini SOAS University of London

Works Cited

Beiser, Frederick C.  The German Historicist Tradition . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.

Best, Steven and Sharon Marcus. “Surface Reading: An Introduction.”  Representations  108, 1 (2009): 1-21.  https://doi.org/10.1525/rep.2009.108.1.1

Chakrabarty, Dipesh.  Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000.

Chen, Duxiu. “On Theater.” In Faye Chunfang Fei, ed./tr.,  Chinese Theories of Theater and Performance from Confucius to the Present . Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1999, 117-120.

Chen, Xiaomei.  Acting the Right Part: Political Theater and Popular Drama in Contemporary China . Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2002.

—–.  Performing the Socialist State: Modern Chinese Theater and Film Culture . New York: Columbia University Press, 2023.

Greene, Maggie.  Resisting Spirits: Drama Reform and Cultural Transformation in the PRC . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2019.

Hu, Shi 胡适. “Wenxue jinhua guannian yu xiju gailiang” 文学进化观念与戏剧改良 (The Concept of Literary Evolution and Theater Reform). In  Hushi w encun 胡适文存 (Hu Shi’s writings), vol. 6. Hefei: Huangshan shushe; Xinhua shudian jingxiao, 1996, 106-116.

Huang, Zuolin. “On Mei Lanfang and Chinese Traditional Theater.” In Faye Chunfang Fei, ed./tr.,  Chinese Theories of Theater and Performance from Confucius to the Present . Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1999, 154-158.

Li, Yu. “Li Liweng on Theater.” In Faye Chunfang Fei, ed./tr.,  Chinese Theories of Theater and Performance from Confucius to the Present . Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1999, 77-87.

Liu, Siyuan.  Transforming Tradition: The Reform of Chinese Theater in the 1950s and Early 1960s . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2021.

Mao, Zedong. “On New Democracy.” In Stuart R. Schram, ed.,  Mao’s Road to Power. Revolutionary Writings 1912-1949: New Democracy . Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2004, 330-369.

Park, Sowon S. “The Adaptive Comparative.”  Comparative Critical Studies  12, 2 (2015): 183-196. DOI: 10.3366/ccs.2015.0166

Schechner, Richard. “Foreword.” In Faye Chunfang Fei, ed./tr.,  Chinese Theories of Theater and Performance from Confucius to the Present . Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1999, ix-xiv.

Smith, Deanna, et al. “Historicism.” URL:  https://anthropology.ua.edu/theory/historicism/

Tian, Min.  The Poetics of Difference and Displacement: Twentieth-Century Chinese-Western Intercultural Theatre . Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2008.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

The Radiant Peace Foundation International, Inc.

~ committed to radiant peace ® ~.

• Radiant Peace Quotes
• Section-1.1
• Content-1.1.1

Quick Links

Welcome to the radiant peace place, welcomes you to the radiant peace place, first-ever book about radiant peace, radiant peace ® , wisdom & tips from children.

An Enduring Vision

Inspiring, encouraging and promoting radiant peace.

Radiant Peace Programs at the Grassroots Level

Programs overview.

• The International Museum of Radiant Peace
• The Radiant Peace Education Awards ® , started in 1990
• Celebrations of The International Day of Radiant Peace held worldwide since 1999
• Radiant Peace caretaking of animals and all living things on Earth
• Protection of special natural sites dedicated to Radiant Peace worldwide
• Recognition of outstanding Radiant Peacemakers
• Radiant Peace walks and events in many countries
• Flying the Radiant Peace banner in homes, schools and businesses on six continents
• To inspire, encourage and promote Radiant Peace
• To serve as a centerpoint for Radiant Peace education worldwide

Read our Purposes .

Copyright © 2008-2024 The Radiant Peace Foundation International, Inc. | All Rights Reserved

Privacy Policy | Based on a design by 1234.info | XHTML 1.0 | CSS 2.0

The Radiant Peace Education Awards ® , Radiant Peace ® and the Radiant Peace Patch are registered service marks of The Radiant Peace Foundation International, Inc.

Repin Academic Institute of Fine Arts

The “gold standard” of artistic expression

It’s an amazing story about Repin Academic Institute of Fine Arts (former Saint Petersburg Imperial Academy of Arts). It was founded in the 18th century and back then French, Italian and German teachers were coming there to teach art. Foreigners don’t teach in this Academy anymore, they study instead.

Few places in the world still teach fine arts the old way, where form is everything.

Repin Academy is the largest and oldest art school in Russia. The Soviet system did it best to save the traditions of classical art education. Today, thanks to these preserved traditions that span over hundreds of years, Repin Academic Institute of Fine Arts is the only classic art school left in the world! This special school has maintained what it refers to as the “gold standard” of artistic expression.

Watch the story of classical art education, love and passion:

Human anatomy for artists – Anatomy Master Class »

To learn how to draw whatever you see or imagine,.

• Receive 15 new videos monthly (45 in total)
• Incredible discount – $4,164
• Bonuses - Fine Art eBooks and Videos
• Drawing Academy Diploma of Excellence after course completion in 3 months
• Personal coaching by Drawing Academy Tutors
• Lifetime membership. Free after the 3rd month

• Immediate access to all 45 video lessons
• Incredible discount – $4,198
• Lifetime membership. No more payments

This Post Has 4 Comments

like a bit of heaven. Thanks for sharing this :)

Thanks a lot for this video!!!

Fantastic. Thanks for posting.

I loved the tone of this video that art is fundamentally a tool for love,tolerance and beauty!

Leave A Reply

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Strangers in Their Own Land: Being Muslim in Modi’s India

Families grapple with anguish and isolation as they try to raise their children in a country that increasingly questions their very identity.

By Mujib Mashal and Hari Kumar

Reporting from Noida and Chennai, India

It is a lonely feeling to know that your country’s leaders do not want you. To be vilified because you are a Muslim in what is now a largely Hindu-first India.

It colors everything. Friends, dear for decades, change. Neighbors hold back from neighborly gestures — no longer joining in celebrations, or knocking to inquire in moments of pain.

“It is a lifeless life,” said Ziya Us Salam, a writer who lives on the outskirts of Delhi with his wife, Uzma Ausaf, and their four daughters.

When he was a film critic for one of India’s main newspapers , Mr. Salam, 53, filled his time with cinema, art, music. Workdays ended with riding on the back of an older friend’s motorcycle to a favorite food stall for long chats. His wife, a fellow journalist, wrote about life, food and fashion.

Now, Mr. Salam’s routine is reduced to office and home, his thoughts occupied by heavier concerns. The constant ethnic profiling because he is “visibly Muslim” — by the bank teller, by the parking lot attendant, by fellow passengers on the train — is wearying, he said. Family conversations are darker, with both parents focused on raising their daughters in a country that increasingly questions or even tries to erase the markers of Muslims’ identity — how they dress, what they eat, even their Indianness altogether.

One of the daughters, an impressive student-athlete, struggled so much that she needed counseling and missed months of school. The family often debates whether to stay in their mixed Hindu-Muslim neighborhood in Noida, just outside Delhi. Mariam, their oldest daughter, who is a graduate student, leans toward compromise, anything to make life bearable. She wants to move.

Anywhere but a Muslim area might be difficult. Real estate agents often ask outright if families are Muslim; landlords are reluctant to rent to them.

“I have started taking it in stride,” Mariam said.

“I refuse to,” Mr. Salam shot back. He is old enough to remember when coexistence was largely the norm in an enormously diverse India, and he does not want to add to the country’s increasing segregation.

But he is also pragmatic. He wishes Mariam would move abroad, at least while the country is like this.

Mr. Salam clings to the hope that India is in a passing phase.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, however, is playing a long game.

His rise to national power in 2014, on a promise of rapid development, swept a decades-old Hindu nationalist movement from the margins of Indian politics firmly to the center. He has since chipped away at the secular framework and robust democracy that had long held India together despite its sometimes explosive religious and caste divisions.

Right-wing organizations began using the enormous power around Mr. Modi as a shield to try to reshape Indian society. Their members provoked sectarian clashes as the government looked away, with officials showing up later to raze Muslim homes and round up Muslim men. Emboldened vigilante groups lynched Muslims they accused of smuggling beef (cows are sacred to many Hindus). Top leaders in Mr. Modi’s party openly celebrated Hindus who committed crimes against Muslims.

On large sections of broadcast media, but particularly on social media, bigotry coursed unchecked. WhatsApp groups spread conspiracy theories about Muslim men luring Hindu women for religious conversion, or even about Muslims spitting in restaurant food. While Mr. Modi and his party officials reject claims of discrimination by pointing to welfare programs that cover Indians equally, Mr. Modi himself is now repeating anti-Muslim tropes in the election that ends early next month. He has targeted India’s 200 million Muslims more directly than ever, calling them “infiltrators” and insinuating that they have too many children.

This creeping Islamophobia is now the dominant theme of Mr. Salam’s writings. Cinema and music, life’s pleasures, feel smaller now. In one book, he chronicled the lynchings of Muslim men. In a recent follow-up, he described how India’s Muslims feel “orphaned” in their homeland.

“If I don’t pick up issues of import, and limit my energies to cinema and literature, then I won’t be able to look at myself in the mirror,” he said. “What would I tell my kids tomorrow — when my grandchildren ask me what were you doing when there was an existential crisis?”

As a child, Mr. Salam lived on a mixed street of Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims in Delhi. When the afternoon sun would grow hot, the children would move their games under the trees in the yard of a Hindu temple. The priest would come with water for all.

“I was like any other kid for him,” Mr. Salam recalled.

Those memories are one reason Mr. Salam maintains a stubborn optimism that India can restore its secular fabric. Another is that Mr. Modi’s Hindu nationalism, while sweeping large parts of the country, has been resisted by several states in the country’s more prosperous south.

Family conversations among Muslims there are very different: about college degrees, job promotions, life plans — the usual aspirations.

In the state of Tamil Nadu, often-bickering political parties are united in protecting secularism and in focusing on economic well-being. Its chief minister, M.K. Stalin, is a declared atheist.

Jan Mohammed, who lives with his family of five in Chennai, the state capital, said neighbors joined in each other’s religious celebrations. In rural areas, there is a tradition: When one community finishes building a place of worship, villagers of other faiths arrive with gifts of fruits, vegetables and flowers and stay for a meal.

“More than accommodation, there is understanding,” Mr. Mohammed said.

His family is full of overachievers — the norm in their educated state. Mr. Mohammed, with a master’s degree, is in the construction business. His wife, Rukhsana, who has an economics degree, started an online clothing business after the children grew up. One daughter, Maimoona Bushra, has two master’s degrees and now teaches at a local college as she prepares for her wedding. The youngest, Hafsa Lubna, has a master’s in commerce and within two years went from an intern at a local company to a manager of 20.

Two of the daughters had planned to continue on to Ph.D’s. The only worry was that potential grooms would be intimidated.

“The proposals go down,” Ms. Rukhsana joked.

A thousand miles north, in Delhi, Mr. Salam’s family lives in what feels like another country. A place where prejudice has become so routine that even a friendship of 26 years can be sundered as a result.

Mr. Salam had nicknamed a former editor “human mountain” for his large stature. When they rode on the editor’s motorcycle after work in the Delhi winter, he shielded Mr. Salam from the wind.

They were together often; when his friend got his driver’s license, Mr. Salam was there with him.

“I would go to my prayer every day, and he would go to the temple every day,” Mr. Salam said. “And I used to respect him for that.”

A few years ago, things began to change. The WhatsApp messages came first.

The editor started forwarding to Mr. Salam some staples of anti-Muslim misinformation: for example, that Muslims will rule India in 20 years because their women give birth every year and their men are allowed four wives.

“Initially, I said, ‘Why do you want to get into all this?’ I thought he was just an old man who was getting all these and forwarding,” Mr. Salam said. “I give him the benefit of doubt.”

The breaking point came two years ago, when Yogi Adityanath, a Modi protégé, was re-elected as the leader of Uttar Pradesh, the populous state adjoining Delhi where the Salam family lives. Mr. Adityanath, more overtly belligerent than Mr. Modi toward Muslims, governs in the saffron robe of a Hindu monk, frequently greeting large crowds of Hindu pilgrims with flowers, while cracking down on public displays of Muslim faith.

On the day of the vote counting, the friend kept calling Mr. Salam, rejoicing at Mr. Adityanath’s lead. Just days earlier, the friend had been complaining about rising unemployment and his son’s struggle to find a job during Mr. Adityanath’s first term.

“I said, ‘You have been so happy since morning, what do you gain?’” he recalled asking the friend.

“Yogi ended namaz,” the friend responded, referring to Muslim prayer on Fridays that often spills into the streets.

“That was the day I said goodbye,” Mr. Salam said, “and he hasn’t come back into my life after that.”

Mujib Mashal is the South Asia bureau chief for The Times, helping to lead coverage of India and the diverse region around it, including Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan. More about Mujib Mashal

Hari Kumar covers India, based out of New Delhi. He has been a journalist for more than two decades. More about Hari Kumar

The Age of Marshall Mathers: a Look at Eminem’s Life and Career

This essay about Eminem highlights his rise from a challenging childhood in Detroit to becoming a major figure in hip-hop and popular culture. It covers his early hardships, breakthrough with “The Slim Shady LP,” and continued success with albums like “The Marshall Mathers LP.” The essay also touches on his battles with addiction, his hiatus, and triumphant return to music, underscoring his lasting influence and resilience.

How it works

In the annals of music history, few figures command as much respect and intrigue as Marshall Mathers, more widely known as Eminem. His life and career have not only redefined the boundaries of hip-hop but have also left a lasting imprint on popular culture. Born on October 17, 1972, in St. Joseph, Missouri, Eminem’s rise from a turbulent upbringing to becoming one of the most influential artists of his generation is a story of remarkable resilience.

Eminem’s early years were fraught with adversity.

Growing up in a predominantly African-American neighborhood in Detroit, he faced frequent bullying and racial discrimination. His father abandoned the family when Eminem was an infant, leaving his mother, Debbie Mathers, to raise him. Their relationship was marked by instability, poverty, and frequent relocations between Missouri and Michigan.

Despite these hardships, Eminem found an escape in music. As a teenager, he immersed himself in hip-hop, honing his skills as a rapper. Influenced by artists like LL Cool J, Nas, and Tupac Shakur, he began performing at local venues and participating in rap battles. His raw talent and lyrical prowess quickly earned him respect within Detroit’s underground rap scene.

Eminem’s breakthrough came in 1997 with the release of his debut album, “Infinite.” Although the album showcased his lyrical dexterity, it failed to gain commercial success and was largely overlooked by mainstream audiences. Undeterred, Eminem continued to refine his craft, pushing the boundaries of his creativity and lyrical content.

His second album, “The Slim Shady LP,” released in 1999, catapulted Eminem to stardom. With its provocative lyrics and dark humor, the album introduced the world to Eminem’s alter ego, Slim Shady, a persona characterized by irreverence and nihilism. Songs like “My Name Is” and “Guilty Conscience” became instant hits, earning Eminem critical acclaim and a dedicated fan base.

“The Marshall Mathers LP,” released in 2000, further solidified Eminem’s status as a cultural icon. The album’s introspective lyrics and autobiographical storytelling offered a glimpse into Eminem’s troubled psyche, addressing themes of addiction, fame, and family dysfunction. Tracks like “Stan” and “The Real Slim Shady” became anthems of a generation, earning Eminem widespread recognition and numerous accolades, including Grammy Awards for Best Rap Album and Best Rap Solo Performance.

Throughout the early 2000s, Eminem continued to dominate the music industry with a series of successful albums, including “The Eminem Show” (2002) and “Encore” (2004). His provocative lyrics and controversial persona sparked debates about censorship and artistic freedom, but they also resonated with millions of fans who saw themselves reflected in his music.

However, Eminem’s success was not without its share of controversies and personal struggles. His battles with addiction, particularly to prescription drugs, threatened to derail his career and personal life. Despite multiple stints in rehab, Eminem struggled to overcome his demons, often turning to music as a form of therapy and self-expression.

In 2006, Eminem took a hiatus from music to focus on his recovery and family life. During this time, he faced tragedy with the death of his close friend and fellow rapper, Proof, who was fatally shot in Detroit. The loss had a profound impact on Eminem, inspiring him to confront his own mortality and reevaluate his priorities.

Eminem made a triumphant return to the music scene in 2009 with the release of “Relapse,” followed by “Recovery” in 2010. Both albums showcased a more introspective and mature Eminem, as he grappled with his past struggles and newfound sobriety. Tracks like “Not Afraid” and “Love the Way You Lie” topped the charts, reaffirming Eminem’s relevance and enduring appeal.

In the years that followed, Eminem continued to push the boundaries of hip-hop with albums like “The Marshall Mathers LP 2” (2013) and “Revival” (2017). Despite mixed reviews from critics, Eminem remained unapologetic in his approach, refusing to conform to industry trends or expectations.

Today, Eminem’s legacy looms large over the world of music, inspiring countless artists and shaping the cultural zeitgeist. From his early struggles in Detroit to his meteoric rise to fame, Eminem’s life and career serve as a testament to the power of perseverance and self-expression. As he continues to defy expectations and silence his critics, one thing remains clear: the era of Marshall Mathers is far from over.

Cite this page

The Age of Marshall Mathers: A Look at Eminem's Life and Career. (2024, May 21). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-age-of-marshall-mathers-a-look-at-eminems-life-and-career/

"The Age of Marshall Mathers: A Look at Eminem's Life and Career." PapersOwl.com , 21 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-age-of-marshall-mathers-a-look-at-eminems-life-and-career/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Age of Marshall Mathers: A Look at Eminem's Life and Career . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-age-of-marshall-mathers-a-look-at-eminems-life-and-career/ [Accessed: 22 May. 2024]

"The Age of Marshall Mathers: A Look at Eminem's Life and Career." PapersOwl.com, May 21, 2024. Accessed May 22, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-age-of-marshall-mathers-a-look-at-eminems-life-and-career/

"The Age of Marshall Mathers: A Look at Eminem's Life and Career," PapersOwl.com , 21-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-age-of-marshall-mathers-a-look-at-eminems-life-and-career/. [Accessed: 22-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Age of Marshall Mathers: A Look at Eminem's Life and Career . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-age-of-marshall-mathers-a-look-at-eminems-life-and-career/ [Accessed: 22-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers